Methods and arrangements for identifying objects

ABSTRACT

In some arrangements, product packaging is digitally watermarked over most of its extent to facilitate high-throughput item identification at retail checkouts. Imagery captured by conventional or plenoptic cameras can be processed (e.g., by GPUs) to derive several different perspective-transformed views—further minimizing the need to manually reposition items for identification. Crinkles and other deformations in product packaging can be optically sensed, allowing such surfaces to be virtually flattened to aid identification. Piles of items can be 3D-modelled and virtually segmented into geometric primitives to aid identification, and to discover locations of obscured items. Other data (e.g., including data from sensors in aisles, shelves and carts, and gaze tracking for clues about visual saliency) can be used in assessing identification hypotheses about an item. Logos may be identified and used—or ignored—in product identification. A great variety of other features and arrangements are also detailed.

RELATED APPLICATION DATA

This application is a continuation-in-part of application Ser. No.15/175,997, filed Jun. 7, 2016, which is a division of application Ser.No. 13/750,752, filed Jan. 25, 2013 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,367,770). Thisapplication is also a continuation of application Ser. No. 14/839,561,filed Aug. 28, 2015 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,600,982), which is a divisionof application Ser. No. 13/946,968, filed Jul. 19, 2013 (now U.S. Pat.No. 9,129,277), which is a continuation-in-part of above-citedapplication Ser. No. 13/750,752, filed Jan. 25, 2013, which claimspriority from provisional applications 61/693,225, filed Aug. 24, 2012;61/716,223, filed Oct. 19, 2012; 61/716,591, filed Oct. 21, 2012; and61/724,854, filed Nov. 9, 2012. application Ser. No. 14/839,561 is alsoa continuation-in-part of application Ser. No. 13/231,893, filed Sep.13, 2011 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,033,238), which claims priority to thefollowing provisional applications: 61/529,214, filed Aug. 30, 2011;61/531,525, filed Sep. 6, 2011; and 61/533,079, filed Sep. 9, 2011.application Ser. No. 14/839,561 is also a continuation-in-part of PCTapplication PCT/US12/53201, filed Aug. 30, 2012, which claims priorityto the following applications: 61/529,214, filed Aug. 30, 2011;61/531,525, filed Sep. 6, 2011; 61/533,079, filed Sep. 9, 2011; Ser. No.13/231,893, filed Sep. 13, 2011 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,033,238)61/537,523, filed Sep. 21, 2011; 61/540,455, filed Sep. 28, 2011;61/544,996, filed Oct. 7, 2011; and 61/693,225, filed Aug. 24, 2012.

The subject matter of this application is also related to that ofpending application Ser. No. 13/804,413, filed Mar. 14, 2013.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present technology concerns technologies useful in retail stores,such as for speeding customer checkout.

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY

The widespread use of barcodes has greatly simplified supermarketcheckout. However, many problems persist, causing both inconvenience forshoppers, and added costs for retailers.

One of the difficulties is finding a barcode on a package. Whileexperienced supermarket clerks eventually learn barcode locations forpopular products, even the best clerks sometimes have difficulty withless common products. For shoppers who use self-service checkoutstations, any product can be confounding.

Another issue concerns re-orienting a package so that its barcode is inposition for reading. Many items are straightforward. However,particularly with large items (e.g., a carton of diapers, or a heavy bagof dog food), it can be a physical challenge to manipulate the productso that the barcode is exposed to the reading device. Often inself-service checkout stations, the physical constraints of the checkoutstation compound the difficulty, as these stations commonly don't havethe handheld scanning capability with which conventional checkouts areequipped—forcing the shopper to manipulate the product so that barcodefaces a glass scanning platen on the counter. (When properly positioned,the shopper may be unable to view either the platen or thebarcode—exacerbating the difficulty.) Moreover, it is not enough for thebarcode to be visible to the scanner; it must also be presented so as toroughly face the scanner (i.e., its surface normal must generally bewithin about 40-50 degrees of facing the scanning device in order to beread).

Sometimes a product is flipped and turned in search of a barcode, onlyto find there is none. Bottles of wine, for example, commonly lackbarcodes.

Yet another issue is occasional difficulty in getting the scanningequipment to successfully read the barcode, after the barcode has beenfound and correctly positioned. This is a particular problem withmalleable items (e.g., a package of frozen peas), in which the barcodedsurface is crinkled or otherwise physically irregular.

To redress such issues, some have proposed identifying products withpassive tags that can be sensed by radio (e.g., RFID and NFC chips).However, the costs of these tags are an obstacle in the low-margingrocery business. And it can be difficult to distinguish the responsesfrom several different items on a checkout counter. Moreover, certainmaterials in the check-out queue may be radio-opaque—preventing someidentifiers from being read. Privacy issues raise yet further concerns.

Other checkout technologies have also been tried. For example, in patentpublication 20040081799, Kodak describes how a marking can be applied tosupermarket packaging by adding a polymer layer that defines scannableinformation in the form of matte and glossy areas. The matte/glossyareas can form indicia such as barcodes, or digital watermarks. However,this technology requires applying a polymer layer to the packaging—afurther expense, and an additional processing step that packagers arenot equipped to provide.

Other identification technologies have been proposed for use inconjunction with barcode-based product identification. For example,patent application 20040199427 proposes capturing 2D imagery ofproducts, and checking their color histograms against histogramsassociated with products identified by sensed barcode data, to ensurecorrect product identification. The same publication similarly proposesweighing articles on the conveyor—again checking for consistency withthe barcode-indicated product. Publications 20040223663 and 20090060259teach related arrangements, in which imagery of products is used tocheck for possibly switched barcodes.

Applicant's U.S. Pat. No. 7,044,395 teaches that a watermark can replacea barcode, such as a UPC symbol or other standard product code, in aretail point of sale application. A reader unit at a checkout counterextracts a product identifier from the watermark, and uses it to look upthe product and its price.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,654,872 describes a system employing two video cameras,which captures images of a 3D article, and uses the imagery to recognizethe article. U.S. Pat. No. 7,398,927 teaches another two-camera system,this one to read product codes from articles despite specularreflections. U.S. Pat. No. 7,909,248 details a self-service checkoutterminal in which captured imagery is compared against a database ofreference imagery to try to identify a matching product.

In accordance with various embodiments of the present technology,certain drawbacks of the prior art are overcome, and new capabilitiesare provided.

For example, in one aspect, the present technology involves markingproduct packaging with a digital watermark that encodes relatedinformation (e.g., Universal Product Codes, such as UPC-A or UPC-E;Electronic Product Codes—EPC, European Article Number Codes—EAN, a URIor web address, etc.). The marking spans a substantial part of thepackaging surface area, so that it can be sensed from one or more fixedcameras at a checkout station without repositioning of the item. Thewatermark indicia is applied to the packaging along with otherprinting—integrated in the other packaging artwork.

In one such embodiment, a variety of recognition technologies are usedat a checkout station—looking for different indicia of productidentification (watermark, barcode, color histogram, weight,temperature, etc.). The system applies a set of rules to the collectedevidence, and outputs a product identification based on the availableinformation.

In another aspect, crinkles and other deformations in malleable productpackaging are optically sensed, and are used in decoding an identifierfrom the distorted surface (e.g., the crinkled surface can be virtuallyflattened prior to decoding the identifier). In one particulararrangement, the crinkled configuration is sensed bystructure-from-motion techniques. In another, the product configurationis sensed by a structured light scanner (e.g., of the sort popularizedby the Microsoft Kinect sensor).

In yet another aspect, a checkout station comprises a conveyor belt thatincludes markings that are optically sensed, and which are used toincrease check-out speed and accuracy.

In still another aspect, imagery captured from an item that is beingconveyor-transported at a checkout station is processed to compensatefor motion blur, prior to applying a product recognition technology.

In yet another aspect, a plenoptic camera system senses information at acheckout station. The collected light field data is then processed toyield multiple different planes of focused imagery, to which productrecognition technologies are applied. In some embodiments, these planesinclude a variety of non-parallel planes.

In still another aspect, 2D imagery that is acquired at a checkoutstation is applied to a GPU, which computes multipleperspective-transformed versions of the imagery. These differentversions of the imagery are then analyzed for product recognitionpurposes. The GPU can process input imagery of several different focallengths, e.g., captured by plural fixed-focus cameras, or by a camerathat cyclically changes its focal plane, or by plenoptic sensing.

In yet another aspect, piled items presented for checkout arevolumetrically modeled and segmented to identify component items in thepile.

In still another aspect, the location of an item that is too obscured tobe identified within a pile, is determined, so that a clerk or amechanical system can expose it for identification.

In yet a further aspect, a confidence score is computed that indicatesthe certainty of an identification hypothesis about an item. Thishypothesis is tested against collected evidence, until the confidencescore exceeds a threshold (or until the process concludes with anambiguous determination).

In still another aspect, data acquired away from the checkout station(e.g., in a store aisle) is used in identifying items at checkout. Thisdata can include, e.g., sensor data evidencing removal of a product froma shelf, location data indicating that the shopper paused near certainmerchandise, etc. Such data may be accorded a weight that varies with atime elapsed between its sensing and item checkout.

In yet another aspect, a clerk's or shopper's interaction with an itemis sensed to aid in identification of the item. For example, a clerk'sgaze may be tracked to identify the location of a salient feature on theitem, or a shopper's particular hand pose in grasping the item whenputting it into a cart or onto a checkout conveyor may provide some clueabout the item's identity.

In still another aspect, a system provides guidance to a clerk orshopper concerning a manner of packing items into bags, e.g., based onthe shapes, weights and temperatures of the purchased items.

In yet a further aspect, different items at a checkout station areilluminated with light of different colors, e.g., to indicate items thathave been successfully identified (or not), to indicate which itemsshould be placed in which bags, etc.

The foregoing and a great number of other features and advantages of thepresent technology will be more readily apparent from the followingdetailed description, which proceeds with reference to the accompanyingdrawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIGS. 1A and 1B show a malleable item at two positions along asupermarket conveyor, being imaged by a camera.

FIGS. 2A and 2B shows how an item with several component planar surfacescan be virtually “flattened” to aid in item identification.

FIGS. 3A and 3B are similar to FIGS. 1A and 1B, but show the item beingimaged by two cameras.

FIG. 3C shows another embodiment employing two cameras.

FIGS. 4A and 4B illustrate how a plenoptic sensor can be used togenerate different planes of focused imagery within an imaging volume,including parallel planes and non-parallel planes.

FIG. 5 illustrates a supermarket checkout conveyor that is imaged by aplenoptic camera system, allowing extraction of multiple frames ofimagery at different focal planes.

FIG. 6 shows a schematic illustration of a checkout system thatconsiders multiple different types of input information, in conjunctionwith stored analysis rules and reference data, to determine productidentification.

FIG. 7 shows a schematic illustration of a hardware arrangement of aparticular embodiment.

FIG. 8 is a perspective view of items on a checkout conveyor.

FIG. 9 is another perspective view of items on a checkout conveyor,including a cylindrical item.

FIG. 10A shows that the most prominent text on most cylindrical items isoriented parallel to the cylinder axis.

FIG. 10B shows that certain cylindrical items include the most prominenttext 270 degrees (clockwise) from the cylinder axis.

FIG. 11 is a detail of the cylindrical item of FIG. 9.

FIG. 12 shows tiled placement of a watermark pattern across a face of acereal box.

FIG. 13 shows the cylindrical surface portion of FIG. 11, and how texton this cylindrical surface provides an important clue to the surfaceorientation.

FIG. 14A shows the cylindrical surface in FIG. 9 rotated so that themost prominent text is oriented vertically.

FIG. 14B shows the cylindrical surface in FIG. 9 rotated so that themost prominent text is oriented 270 degrees from vertical.

FIG. 15 shows the cylindrical surface portion of FIG. 12, rotated 30,60, 90, 120, 150, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300, and 330 degrees by cores of aGPU, and indicating two of these rotations as potentially the best forderiving identifying information.

FIG. 16 shows how a long edge of a segmented image region can be used asa clue to watermark orientation.

FIGS. 17A and 17B show the long edge of FIG. 16 rotated in two verticalorientations.

FIG. 18 shows how the minor axis of a ellipse can be used as a clue towatermark orientation.

FIGS. 19 and 20 show how even parts of ellipses can be used as clues towatermark orientation.

FIG. 21 shows perspective distortion of the cereal box artwork of FIG.12.

FIG. 22 is an isometric image depicting a cylinder (e.g., a can) on aconveyor.

FIG. 23 is an enlarged detail of FIG. 22.

FIG. 24 shows the imagery of FIG. 23, with the axis of the can labelreoriented to vertical.

FIG. 25 shows the imagery of FIG. 24, processed to invert the apparentcompression of the label artwork near the edges of the cylindrical can.

FIG. 26 is a view like FIG. 9, but the conveyor is oriented in adifferent direction, and the objects include a cylindrical articlepartially obscured by other items.

FIG. 27 illustrates the geometry used in “unrolling” the cylindricalartwork on a can, when an edge of the can is discernible.

FIG. 28 is like FIG. 27, but for where the edge of the can is notdiscernible.

FIG. 29 shows product packaging, demonstrating how lines of text can beused to assess perspective distortion.

FIG. 30 shows two perpendicular dimensions of perspective distortion:tilt and tip.

FIGS. 31, 31A, 32-37, 38A, 38B, 39A and 39B illustrate certain otheraspects of the detailed technology.

FIGS. 40A-40F show six images captured from a checkout camera whensweeping a soft drink can for checkout (at a medium pace of sweeping, bya non-professional checker).

FIGS. 41A and 41B show a “B17” block pattern used to select candidateblocks of imagery for watermark decoding.

FIGS. 42A-J are illustrations based on a sequence of image captureswhile a coffee can was passed in front of a camera.

FIGS. 43A and 43B are graphs detailing results achieved with differentdetection approaches.

FIG. 44 shows artwork from four Kellogg's cereals.

FIG. 45 conceptually shows a reference database that can be used inimage fingerprint matching.

FIG. 46A shows artwork from Kellogg's Raisin Bran cereal.

FIG. 46B illustrates SIFT feature descriptors extracted from the artworkof FIG. 46A.

FIG. 47 conceptually shows a reference database that can be used in oneillustrative implementation of the present technology.

FIG. 48 shows the top quarter of four reference artworks.

FIG. 49 shows common graphical features extracted from the FIG. 48artworks.

FIG. 50 shows artwork for a Kellogg's trademark, available from the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office.

FIG. 51 conceptually shows a reference database similar to that of FIG.47.

FIG. 52 shows captured imagery of a cracker-box taken from too-close avantage point to allow reliable product identification.

FIG. 53 shows an alternative image of the cracker box of FIG. 52, takenfrom a better vantage point.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Due to the great range and variety of subject matter detailed in thisdisclosure, an orderly presentation is difficult to achieve. As will beevident, many of the topical sections presented below are both foundedon, and foundational to, other sections. Necessarily, then, the varioussections are presented in a somewhat arbitrary order. It should berecognized that both the general principles and the particular detailsfrom each section find application in other sections as well. To preventthe length of this disclosure from ballooning out of control(conciseness always being beneficial, especially in patentspecifications), the various permutations and combinations of thefeatures of the different sections are not exhaustively detailed.Applicant intends to explicitly teach such combinations/permutations,but practicality requires that the detailed synthesis be left to thosewho ultimately implement systems in accordance with such teachings.

It should also be noted that the presently-detailed technologies buildon, and extend, technology disclosed applicant's other patent documentsreferenced herein. The reader is thus directed to those documents, whichdetail arrangements in which applicant intends the present technology tobe applied, and that technically supplement the present disclosure.

In accordance with one aspect, the present technology concerns a methodfor identifying items, e.g., by a supermarket checkout system. A firstsuch method involves moving an item to be purchased along a path, suchas by a conveyor. A first camera arrangement captures first 2D imagedata depicting the item when the item is at a first position along thepath. Second 2D image data is captured when the item is at a secondposition along the path. A programmed computer, or other device,processes the captured image data—in conjunction with geometricalinformation about the path and the camera—to discern 3D spatialorientation information for a first patch on the item. By reference tothis 3D spatial orientation information, the system determinesobject-identifying information from the camera's depiction of at leastthe first patch.

In a variant embodiment, the second 2D image data is captured by asecond camera arrangement—either when the item is at its first positionor its second position along the path.

The object-identifying information can be a machine-readable identifier,such as a barcode or a steganographic digital watermark, either of whichcan convey a plural-bit payload. This information can additionally oralternatively comprise text—recognized by an optical characterrecognition engine. Still further, the product can be identified byother markings, such as by image fingerprint information that is matchedto reference fingerprint information in a product database.

In some embodiments, the system processes the first and second 2D imagedata—in conjunction with geometrical information about the path and thecamera—to discern second 3D spatial orientation information—this timefor a second patch on the item. This second 3D spatial orientationinformation is typically different than the first 3D spatial orientationinformation. That is, the second patch is not co-planar with the firstpatch (e.g., the patches may depict different sides of a carton, or thesurface may be deformed or wrinkled). By reference to the discernedfirst and second 3D spatial orientation information, the systemdetermines identification information for the item. In such arrangement,the identification information is typically based on at least a portionof the first patch and a portion of the second patch. In the case of abarcode, for example, it may span both patches.

In like fashion, the system can determine the 3D pose of an arbitrarynumber of non-parallel patches on the item, and identify the item basedon information from plural such patches.

In some embodiments, the item is moved by a conveyor belt that isprovided with markings (e.g., printed or otherwise applied to itssurface). These markings can be steganographic or overt. The imagerycaptured by the camera arrangement(s) includes at least some of thesemarkings. The system analyzes the markings in the captured imagery inconnection with the product identification. For example, the system canemploy such markings to sense the speed of the conveyor, or to sense thedistance to a point on an item resting on the conveyor, or to sense asize of the item on the conveyor, or to calibrate color information inthe image(s) (e.g., white balance), or to provide an “image prior”useful in determining a deblurring kernel for motion blur compensationor for other image enhancement processing, etc.

One illustrative marking is a pattern of white “+” indicia, of knowndimensions, arrayed uniformly across a black conveyor. Another is a 2Dbarcode symbology (e.g., a QR code), again printed white-on-black. Thesame symbology may be regularly repeated, or different symbologies canbe used at different locations on the belt (e.g., at different distancesfrom a reading window; the barcode can encode information related to itsposition on the belt).

In some instances, the markings are visible and promotional (e.g., textmarkings), yet can still serve one or more of the purposes detailedherein.

The foregoing will be made clearer by a particular example:

FIG. 1A shows a supermarket checkout station 10 in which an item 12 tobe purchased is transported by a conveyor belt 14. A first camera 16captures image data depicting the item.

Item 12 may be irregular in shape, such as a package of frozen peas. Itsconfiguration can be regarded as a collection of adjoining surfacepatches (e.g., patch 18), each oriented at a different angle. (Theorientation of a patch may be characterized by two angles. One is theangle (theta) relative to the lengthwise axis of the conveyor, i.e., theangle at which the plane of the patch intersects that lengthwise axis.The second is the angle (phi, not depicted in FIG. 1A) relative to thecrosswise axis of the conveyor, i.e., the angle at which the plane ofthe patch intersects that cross-wise axis. Other geometries can ofcourse be substituted.)

Camera 16 generates imagery in which each patch is depicted with aparticular size, shape and position within the image frame, based on (1)the two orientation angles for the patch, (2) the 2D position of theitem on the conveyor, i.e., both along its length and width; (3) theheight of the patch relative to the conveyor; (4) the lens function ofthe camera; and (5) the patch geometry itself.

In FIG. 1A, the patch 18 subtends an angle alpha (α). In the depictedrepresentation, this patch spans a distance “x” across the camerasensor's field of view “y”—corresponding to a particular range ofsensing elements in the camera's sensor (typically CCD or CMOS).

A moment later, the package of peas 12 has moved a distance “d” alongthe conveyor, as shown in FIG. 1B. The angle alpha has changed, as hasthe span “x” of the patch across the sensor's field of view.

By reference to known parameters, e.g., the conveyed distance d, thechange in pixels spanned by the patch (which correlates with the anglealpha), and the camera lens function, the system determines the angletheta in FIG. 1B (and also in FIG. 1A).

Once the angle theta has been determined, an exemplary system performs aperspective-transform (e.g., an affine-transform) on the depiction ofthe patch 18 in the FIG. 1B captured imagery, to yield transformedimagery that compensates for the angle theta. That is, a transformedpatch of imagery is produced in which the patch appears as if it lies inplane 20, with an angle θ′ that is perpendicular to a ray 22 from thepatch to the camera lens.

In like fashion, the angle phi (not shown in FIG. 1B, due to the sideview) can be determined. Again, the depiction of the patch 18 can becorrespondingly transformed to compensate for this angle phi, to yield avirtually reoriented patch that lies in a plane perpendicular to ray 22.

Techniques for deriving the 3D geometry of patch 18 from the capturedimagery are familiar to those skilled in the art, and include “structurefrom motion” and “simultaneous localization and mapping” (SLAM) methods.These techniques commonly rely on identification of distinctive features(salient points) in one image, and identifying corresponding features inanother image. The difference in relative positions of the featuresbetween the two images indicates the geometry of the surface on whichthey lie. (One class of distinctive feature suitable for such analysisis the class of “corner points.” Corner points include features such asthe ends of lines on contrasting backgrounds. It will be recognized thatbarcodes have multiple such features—two for each line in the barcode.Another such distinctive feature is the robust local identifier, e.g.,as used in SIFT and SURF techniques.)

All of the other patches comprising item 12, which are viewable by thecamera in both FIG. 1A and FIG. 1B, are similarly transformed. Suchtransformations desirably also transform the scale of the depictedpatches so that each appears—after transformation—to lie the samedistance from the camera sensor, perpendicular to the camera axis.

By such processing, the system renders a virtually flattened package ofpeas (or other 3D shape)—presented as if its component face patches arecoplanar and facing the camera.

FIGS. 2A and 2B schematically illustrate this virtual flattening. Item12 includes three component patches 18, 20 and 22, lying in differentplanes. These patches are imaged by camera 16, from two (or more)different perspectives (e.g., as the item is moved along the conveyor).Based on such information, the system determines the location of thethree patches in 3D space. It then re-projects the three patches to liein a common plane 24, as if facing the camera, i.e., parallel to thecamera's image sensor. (Dashed lines separate the three componentre-projected surfaces in FIG. 2B. Of course, this illustration onlyshows virtual flattening of the surface along one dimension. A preferredimplementation also virtually flattens the surface along the crosswisedimension of the conveyor, i.e., into the page.)

To this set of re-mapped image data, an extraction process is applied togenerate identification data corresponding to the item. The preferredembodiment applies a digital watermark decoding algorithm, but otheridentification technologies (e.g., barcode decoding, imagefingerprinting, OCR, etc.) alternatively can be used.

If a watermark or barcode is present on item 12, it can likely bedecoded, regardless of the irregular configuration or presentation ofthe item on the conveyor. Such marking may be found within a singlepatch, or it may span two or more patches. In a preferred embodiment,the digital watermarking spans a substantial portion of the packagingextent. In regions where there is no printing (e.g., white space), ayellow or other unobtrusive watermark tint can be applied. (Yellowwatermarking is particularly discussed, e.g., in published application20110274310 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,345,104.)

In some embodiments, it is not necessary to virtually reorient thepatch(es) to compensate for both angles theta and phi. Because manydecoders are tolerant of some angular skew, a partial angularcompensation of the patch(es), in theta and/or phi, is often sufficientfor reliable decoding. For example, the patches may be remapped so theyall have the same theta angle, but various phi angles. Or a partialcorrection in either or both of those dimensions can be applied. (Apartial correction may be effected through use of affine transforms,whereas a perfect correction may require non-affine, perspectivetransforms.) Image fingerprinting techniques (e.g., SIFT, SURF and ORB)that are used for object identification are also somewhat robust tonon-plan views of the object. Yet some virtual remapping of the imageryto re-project it to a more flattened state is helpful to assure bestresults.

The distance along the conveyor can be determined by reference to thedifference in times at which the images of FIGS. 1A and 1B are captured,if the conveyor velocity is uniform and known. As noted, the belt may beprovided with markings by which its movement alternatively can bedetermined. (The markings can be promotional in nature, e.g., Tony theTiger, sponsored by Kellogg's.) In still other embodiments, a conveyoris not used. Instead, the item is moved past the camera by hand. In suchcase, the distance and other path parameters can be estimated by featuretracking, from features in the captured imagery. Alternatively, astructured light scanning arrangement can be employed.

In some implementations, the speed of the conveyor varies in accordancewith signals from a control unit, e.g., operated by a cashier's foot.The speed can be sensed by an electro-mechanical arrangement (e.g., aroller wheel and an optical chopper) or from analysis of the capturedimagery. Such knowledge of the conveyor speed can be used in extractingidentification information relating to objects on the conveyor (e.g., remitigating motion blur before extracting identification information,etc.).

FIGS. 3A and 3B show a further arrangement in which two cameras areused. Such arrangement allows image capture from patches of the itemthat may not be visible to a single camera. In such embodiment, thecameras may be at different elevations relative to the conveyor(including below, e.g., looking up through a glass platen). They mayalso be oriented at different angles (theta and/or phi) relative to theconveyor. They can also be spaced at different positions along thelength of the conveyor, so that the time intervals that the item isviewed by the two cameras are not co-extensive. That is, the firstcamera captures imagery of the item during a first period, and thesecond camera captures imagery of the item during later period (whichmay, or may not, overlap with the first period). If a patch is visibleto both cameras, the additional captured imagery allows more accuratevirtual transformation of the depicted image patches to facilitateidentifier discernment. A virtual planar reconstruction of the packagesurface is desirably generated using imagery from the two cameras.

FIG. 3C shows another two-camera arrangement. This arrangement includesa first camera looking up through a glass window 32 in a checkoutcounter 33, and a second camera looking across the checkout counterthrough a window 34 in a vertical housing. The two cameras arepositioned so that their camera axes intersect at right angles.

Segmentation techniques are used to identify different items withinimagery captured by the two cameras. Feature points found in onecamera's imagery within a segmented shape are matched with correspondingpoints in the second camera's imagery. If three or more such points arefound in both images (e.g., as indicated by the “+” symbols in FIG. 3C),the orientation of the plane defined by such points can be determined bythe positions of the three points in the two different images. (E.g., inthe two-dimensional depiction of FIG. 3C, the orientation of the line 25containing the three points causes the points to appear closer togetherin the imagery of camera 1 than in the imagery of camera 2.) With thisclue as to the orientation of a product surface, imagery of the surfacecan be processed to remove associated perspective distortion (i.e.,image rectification), prior to applying a watermark decoding algorithmto the imagery.

In other embodiments, three or more camera arrangements can be used.

In accordance with another aspect of the present technology, thecheckout station captures imagery of different colors, e.g., byilluminating the area with different colors of light. The differentcolors of imagery can be captured simultaneously (e.g., by differentcameras) or serially. The different frames of information can beprocessed to generate different information, or to serve differentpurposes.

One particular implementation illuminates the items with a repeatingsequence of three colors: white, infrared, and ultraviolet. Each coloris suited for different purposes. For example, the white light cancapture an overt product identification symbology; the ultraviolet lightcan excite anti-counterfeiting markings on genuine products; and theinfrared light can be used to sense markings associated with couponingand other marketing initiatives.

Different frames of captured imagery can be utilized to synthesizeenhanced frames of imagery for use as described above (e.g., productidentification, anti-counterfeiting, and marketing).

Other aspects of the present technology make use of one or moreplenoptic cameras (sometimes termed multi-aperture sensors, radiancecameras, or light field cameras). Some such cameras employ an array ofplural component cameras, typically formed on a common substrate, eachwith its own lens. These cameras may be viewed as sensing a 4D lightfield. From their collected data, they can produce frames of data atarbitrary focal planes. This allows captured imagery to be “focusedafter the fact.”

For example, in FIG. 4A, a plenoptic camera system processes the datacaptured by its component sensors to yield a frame focused at focalplane “a.” The same data can also be processed to yield a frame focusedat focal plane “b” or “c.”

The focal planes needn't be parallel, as shown in FIG. 4A. Instead, theycan be non-parallel (e.g., focal planes “d,” “e” and “f” in FIG. 4B).One particular technique for synthesizing tilted focal plane imagery isknown to artisans from Vaish et al, Synthetic Aperture Focusing using aShear-Warp Factorization of the Viewing Transform, 2005 IEEE ComputerSociety Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.129-136.

In one embodiment, captured plenoptic information is processed to yielda first set of imagery having a focal plane coincident with a firstplane through a volume that encompasses at least part of an item. Theplenoptic information is also processed to yield a second set of imageryhaving a focal plane coincident with a second plane through said volume,where the first and second planes are non-parallel. The thus-processedinformation is then analyzed to discern object identificationinformation.

Referring to FIG. 5 (which is a plan view looking down on a conveyor ofan exemplary embodiment), the plenoptic information from camera 50 isprocessed to yield many different focal planes of imagery through avolume that encompasses the items on the conveyor. If the items areimagined as occupying a hemispherical region 52 on the conveyor 14, onefocal plane 54 (shown in dashed lines) extends vertically up from thecentral axis 51 of the conveyor, bisecting the hemisphere. Three otherplanes 56, 58, 60 similarly extend up perpendicularly from the plane ofthe conveyor, spaced successively three inches closer to the edge 62 ofthe conveyor. (Three further planes—not shown, for clarity ofillustration—are similarly disposed near the other edge 64 of theconveyor.)

In addition to this first plurality of parallel planes, the plenopticdata is also processed to yield a second plurality of focal planes thatagain extend vertically up from the plane of the conveyor, but areskewed relative to its central axis 51. The depicted planes of thissecond plurality, 66, 68, 70 and 72 correspond to the planes of thefirst plurality, but are skewed +15 degrees.

Although not shown in FIG. 5 (for clarity of illustration), additionalsets of focal plane imagery are similarly derived from the plenopticcamera data, e.g., oriented at skew angles of +30, +45, and +60 degrees.Likewise, such planes are generated at skew angles of −15, −30, −45, and−60 degrees.

All the just-described planes extend vertically up, perpendicularly fromthe conveyor.

The plenoptic information is also processed to yield tilted focalplanes, i.e., that do not extend vertically up from the conveyor, butinstead are inclined. Counterparts to each of the above-described planesare generated at a tilt angle of 15 degrees. And others are generated attilt angles of 30, 45 and 60 degrees. And still others are generated attilt angles of −15, −30, −45, and −60 degrees.

Thus, in this exemplary embodiment, the plenoptic information capturedby camera 50 is processed to yield a multitude of different focal planesof image information, slicing the hemispherical volume with planes everythree inches, and at every 15 degrees. The resulting sets of imageinformation are then analyzed for product identification information(e.g., by applying to watermark decoder, barcode decoder, fingerprintidentification module, etc.). Depending on the location and orientationof the item surfaces within the examined volume, different of theseplanes can reveal different product identification information.

While plenoptic cameras are generally conceived as full color devices,they needn't be so for product identification. For example, a watermarksignal may be encoded in product packaging in a red channel, and acorresponding monochrome (red) plenoptic camera can be used fordecoding. In such a camera, the usual four-cell Bayer pattern ofred/green/green/blue can be eliminated, and all of the sensor elementscan sense red alone.

(Although described with reference to a single plenoptic camera, actualimplementations can use two or more cameras, as shown in dotted lines inFIG. 5. Information from such plural cameras can be combined orotherwise used in concert.)

While detailed in connection with an embodiment employing plenopticinformation, this concept of examining plural different focal planes ofimagery for product identification information can be implemented inother manners. One is to use a fixed focus camera to capture a singleplane of imagery, and provide the imagery to a GPU that applies acollection of different image transformations. For example, the GPU canapply a +15 degree corrective perspective transform. This process hasthe effect of taking any physical surface inclined −15 degrees relativeto the image focal plane (i.e., inclined −15 degrees to the camerasensor in typical embodiments), and warp it so that it appears as if itsquarely faced the camera. (Desirably, the scene is adequately lit sothat the captured imagery has a depth of field that spans the surfacebeing imaged.) The GPU can similarly re-project the original imagery athorizontal tilts of −60, −45, −30, −15, +15, +30, +45, and +60 degrees,and at vertical tilts −60, −45, −30, −15, +15, +30, +45, and +60degrees. It can likewise warp the original image at each combination ofthese horizontal and vertical tilts. Each resultant set of image datacan be processed by an identification module to extract objectidentification information.

(Before applying the captured image data to the GPU for perspectivetransformation, or before applying the GPU-transformed image data to theidentification module, the data is desirably examined for suitablefocus. Focused regions can be identified by their high frequencycontent, or their high contrast, as compared with out-of-focus imagery.Imagery that is determined to be out of focus needn't be furtherprocessed.)

If the depth of field of a conventional fixed focus camera is notadequate, known extended depth of field imaging techniques can be used(see, e.g., U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,218,448, 7,031,054 and 5,748,371).

In still other arrangements, the system uses a variable focus camera,and its focal plane is cyclically changed (e.g., mechanically or byfluid action) to capture successive planes of imagery at different focallengths. These images are provided to a GPU to apply different imagetransformations, as detailed above.

A GPU is well suited for use in the detailed arrangements, because itemploys a plurality of processing cores to execute similar instructionson several sets of data simultaneously. Such a GPU can likewise beemployed to perform a watermark or barcode decoding operation, or afingerprint extraction operation, or an OCR operation, on multiple setsof data (e.g., the differently-transformed image sets) simultaneously.

A GPU can also be used to perform processing of information acquired bya plenoptic camera arrangement. For example, a GPU can extract thedifferent planes of focused imagery. Or another processor can extractparallel planes of focused imagery (e.g., planes 54-60 in FIG. 5), andthen a GPU can perspective-transform these parallel planes to yield adiversity of other planes that are not parallel to planes 54-60. Instill other arrangements, a GPU is employed both to process the capturedinformation (to yield multiple sets of imagery in different focalplanes), and also to process the multiple sets of imagery to extractidentification information. In yet other arrangements, multiple GPUs areused, including in embodiments with multiple cameras.

FIG. 8 shows a checkout conveyor 14 carrying various items for purchase,from the perspective of an illustrative imaging camera. The items arearranged on the conveyor in such a manner that item 80 is largelyobscured. Its position may be such that no barcode is ever visible toany camera as the item passes along the conveyor, and its visiblesurfaces may be too small to enable object recognition based on othertechnologies, such as image fingerprinting or digital watermarking.

In accordance with another aspect of the present technology, a 3D imagesegmentation algorithm is applied to determine the different shapes onthe conveyor. The system associates the different segmented shapes onthe conveyor with the different object identifiers derived from sensorinformation. If there is a mismatch in number (e.g., segmentation showsfour items on the FIG. 8 conveyor, but the system may output only threeproduct identifications), this circumstance is flagged to the operator.Image data highlighting the outlier item (i.e., item 80 in FIG. 8) canbe provided to a supervisor for review and action, and/or a diverter candivert the item from the flow of items through checkout—for manualprocessing without stopping other checkout progress.

(For a review of illustrative segmentation algorithms, see, e.g.,Wirjadi, Survey of 3d Image Segmentation Methods, Reports of FraunhoferITWM, No. 123, 2007. Two popular classes of segmentation techniques arethresholding and region growing. Related technology for dimensioningobjects on a supermarket conveyor is detailed in U.S. Pat. No.7,344,082.)

In accordance with a further aspect of the present technology, thecheckout conveyor of FIGS. 1 and 8 moves at a uniform rate. However,frames of imagery are not similarly captured at uniform intervals.Instead, the system captures frames at non-uniform intervals.

For example, the camera imagery may reveal a gap between items in thelongitudinal direction of the conveyor. (Such a gap “x” is shown betweenitems 82 and 84 of FIG. 8.) When such a gap is present, it presents anopportunity to capture imagery depicting a product face that may beexposed only briefly (e.g., part 86 of face 85 of item 84 that isgenerally occluded by item 82). The system controls the camera tocapture an image frame when part 86 is maximally revealed. If thisinstant comes at time t=175 ms, and the system normally captures imageframes at uniform intervals of 50 ms, then an extra frame is captured att=175 ms (e.g., frames captures at 0 ms, 50 ms, 100 ms, 150 ms, 175 ms,200 ms . . . ). Alternatively, the system may delay or advance a regularframe of image capture so as to capture a frame at the desired instant(e.g., 0 ms, 50 ms, 100 ms, 175 ms, 200 ms, 250 ms . . . ). Such anevent-driven frame capture may establish the timing by which subsequentframes are uniformly captured (e.g., 0 ms, 50 ms, 100 ms, 175 ms, 225ms, 275 ms . . . ).

In an alternative arrangement, frame capture is performed at regularintervals. However, the system slows or pauses the conveyor 14 so as toallow image capture from a surface that is only briefly visible to thecamera (e.g., part 86). After such image has been captured, the conveyorresumes its normal motion.

FIG. 9 shows a similar conveyor, but this time including a cylindricalarticle 90. (Only part of the cylindrical surface is visible; some isdownward-facing, and the camera's view of another portion of its surfaceis occluded by item 84.)

According to another aspect of the present technology, text found inimagery serves as rotation-orientation information useful in extractingitem identification.

Consider the cylindrical grocery items shown in FIG. 10A. Each includesprominent text, and the generally-horizontal line of text is inclined(up to the right, as shown by the dashed lines). However, despite suchinclination, the up-down axis of each letter points vertically upward(shown by the solid arrows).

FIG. 10B shows a contrary case. Here the up-down axis of each prominentletter points to the side, i.e., 270 degrees clockwise from verticallyupward. (“Prominent” text here refers to text that is larger than thesmallest text visible on an item.)

Naturally, there are exceptions. But by and large, the up-down axis ofthe biggest text on an item (cylindrical or otherwise) is generallyparallel with one of the principle axes of the item.

As is familiar to artisans, digital watermarking patterns are typicallyapplied to items in a tiled fashion, with a single square watermarkpattern being replicated across and down the item being watermarked.FIG. 12 shows an example. Here artwork for a box of cereal is digitallywatermarked with tiled patterns. The tiles are typically embedded withan upper left corner (indicated by an “x”) of a first tile coincidentwith the upper left corner of the artwork. Tiles are then placed acrossand down from this starting point.

Each watermark pattern has an orientation (indicated by the arrows inFIG. 12). Again, common practice is to embed the watermark tiles so thatthey are oriented in the same manner as the artwork (i.e., with “up” inthe artwork corresponding to “up” in the watermark pattern).

To read the watermark from image data, the watermark decoder must firstdetermine the orientation of the watermark tiles. The watermarkdecoder's work may be eased, and decoding speed may be increased, ifthis task of determining orientation is shortcut in some fashion.

The up-down orientation of prominent text on packaging often providessuch a shortcut. The orientation of the letter “C” in Cheerios in FIG.12 indicates the orientation of the watermark encoded in the cereal boxartwork.

Likewise, the orientation of the prominent text on the items of FIG. 10Aindicates the orientation at which a watermark on these items likely isto be found.

If a watermark decode operation, based on an assumption that thewatermark is oriented in the same direction as the prominent text,fails, a second watermark decode operation can be tried—this oneassuming that the watermark is oriented 90 degrees from the orientationof the biggest text. Such is the case with the Coke can of FIG. 10B.(That is, the watermark pattern is applied as on the cereal box of FIG.12, with the top of the watermark tile being oriented towards the top ofthe product, which in FIG. 10B is 90 degrees clockwise from theorientation of the prominent text “Coke.”)

Returning to the conveyor example, a segmentation module identifies andextracts the portion of the camera imagery depicting the shaded surfaceof item 90. (Known 2D segmentation can be used here.) This image excerptis passed to a text detector module that identifies at least oneprominent alphabetic character. (Known OCR techniques can be used.) Moreparticularly, such module identifies a prominent marking in the imageexcerpt as being a text character, and then determines its orientation,using various rules. (E.g., for capital letters B, D, E, F, etc., therules may indicate that the longest straight line points up-down; “up”can be discerned by further, letter-specific, rules. The module appliesother rules for other letters.) The text detector module then outputsdata indicating the orientation of the analyzed symbol.

For clarity of illustration, the depicted surface includes only a singleletter, a “B” (FIG. 11). The text detector module outputs dataindicating that this letter is presented in the image excerpt at anorientation of 202 degrees (FIG. 13).

With this as a clue as to the orientation of any embedded watermark, thesystem next rotates the image excerpt clockwise 158 degrees, so that the“B” is oriented vertically (i.e., 0 degrees), as shown in FIG. 14A. Awatermark decode operation is then attempted on this excerpt. Thedecoder looks for a watermark pattern at this orientation. Ifunsuccessful, it may further try looking for the watermark pattern atsmall orientation offsets (e.g., at selected orientation angles+/−8degrees of the FIG. 14A orientation).

If no watermark is found, the system can next rotate the image excerpt afurther 270 degrees clockwise, to the orientation depicted in FIG. 14B.Again, the same decode operations can be repeated.

In some embodiments, if no watermark is then decoded, the system mayconclude that there probably is no watermark, and curtail furtherwatermark processing of the image excerpt. Alternatively, it may employa prior art method to undertake a more exhaustive analysis of the imageexcerpt to try to find a watermark—considering all possible orientations(e.g., as detailed in the assignee's U.S. Pat. No. 6,590,996).

A variant embodiment is shown in FIG. 15. In this embodiment, the imageexcerpt is applied to a GPU, which uses one core to rotate it 30degrees, another core to rotate it 60 degrees, and so on for allincrements up through 330 degrees. All of these operations are performedsimultaneously. Including the original image excerpt, there are 12differently-rotated versions of the image excerpt. (12 was the maximumnumber that could be presented conveniently on a single drawing sheet;in actual practice there may be many more, e.g., 36 at rotationalincrements of 10 degrees, 120 at rotational increments of 3 degrees,etc.)

One approach is to examine each of these differently-rotated excerptsfor a watermark—assuming the watermark is oriented “up” in the differentdepicted orientations (or within a small angular offset of +/−15degrees).

More economical, however, is for the system to rank the differentrotation states based on the likelihood of finding a watermark at thatorientation state. In the FIG. 15 example, the system ranks the 150degree rotation as number 1, because this rotation orients the prominenttext character “B” most nearly upright. If a watermark is present in theimage excerpt, it will most likely be found by examining this number1-ranked excerpt (again, +/−15 degrees).

If no watermark is found, the system then considers the number 2-rankedexcerpt. Here, the number 2-ranked excerpt is the one rotated 60degrees. The system ranks this excerpt as number two because theorientation of the text character B is closest to 270 degrees (as inFIG. 10B). Again, the system applies a watermark decoding algorithm tothis rotated version of the image excerpt—again examining nearbyrotation states too (+/−15 degrees).

If no watermark is yet decoded, the system may give up, or it mayconsider other rotational states (e.g., perhaps ranked number 3 becauseof the orientation of other detected text). Or, again, it may invoke aprior art method to search for a watermark of any rotational state.

While the foregoing discussion of text focused on cylindrical objects,the same principles are applicable to items of arbitrary shape.

Another implementation functions without regard to the presence of textin the imagery. Referring to FIG. 16, the system passes the segmentedregion to an edge finding module, which identifies the longest straightedge 98 in the excerpt. (In one implementation, only boundary edges ofthe segmented region are considered; in another, internal edges areconsidered too). The angle of this line serves as a clue to theorientation of any watermark.

(A variety of edge detection technologies are known to artisans. TheCanny edge detection technique is popular. Others include Sobel andHarris edge detectors.)

In FIG. 16, there is directional ambiguity—there is no text symbol toindicate which direction is “up.” Thus, two possible orientations areindicated, 202 degrees and 22 degrees in this example.

The system then rotates the FIG. 16 excerpt to make this longest linevertical, as shown in FIG. 17A. As described above, a watermark decodingoperation is tried, assuming the watermark is oriented up in this imagepresentation. If such attempt fails, the system next rotates the excerpta further 180 degrees (FIG. 17B) and tries again.

As described above, a GPU implementation can also be utilized, with thesystem ranking different rotation states for further analysis, based ondirectional clues—in this case the orientation of the long edge.

A still further implementation relies on circles, rather than straightlines or text. Supermarkets contain countless cylindrical items—mostlycanned goods. Such items have two circular faces, which commonly are notprinted (e.g., face 92 in FIG. 11). Yet the presentation of the circularface (or part thereof, as in FIG. 11) provides a clue as to theorientation of watermark encoding on an adjoining cylindrical surface.

FIG. 18 shows a can 102, as it might be viewed on a conveyor. Itscircular end 104 (which may be a top or bottom), viewed obliquely,appears as an ellipse. An ellipse is characterized by major and minoraxes. The major axis 106 is the longest diameter; the minor axis 108 isthe shortest diameter. The minor axis can be used like the long edge ofFIG. 16, as a clue to the watermark orientation. That is, the minoraxis, if extended, crosses the label side of the can from top-to-bottom(or bottom-to-top), as shown by line 110. The orientation of this linetypically corresponds to the orientation of the watermark printed on thecan's cylindrical surface.

Thus, a system according to this embodiment of the technology uses theorientation of line 110 in FIG. 18 like the orientation of line 98 inFIG. 16. For example, an image excerpt depicting the can is rotated tomake this line 110 vertical, and watermark decoding is tried. Ifunsuccessful, the excerpt is rotated 180 degrees, and decoding is triedagain. Again, a GPU implementation can be utilized, with the systemranking the two rotations in which line 110 is oriented most nearlyvertically as the most likely contenders.

Often, as in FIG. 9, only a segment of an ellipse is visible to thecamera. The system can analyze captured imagery to find segments ofellipses, e.g., using curve fitting techniques, or using a Houghtransform. See, e.g., Yuen, et al, Ellipse Detection Using the HoughTransform, Proc. of the Fourth Alvey Vision Conf., 1988. Even from asegment, the direction of the minor axis can be estimated, and used asabove.

One way of determining the minor axis of an ellipse, and thus ofdetermining the up-down orientation of the cylindrical object (e.g.,line 110 in FIG. 18), is to examine the curvature of the ellipse. Again,Hough or curve fitting techniques are used to identify an ellipticaledge in an image excerpt. Consider FIG. 19, which shows an excerpt 118of an ellipse—the remainder of the ellipse being occluded from thecamera's view by other items on the conveyor. (Other parts of thecaptured imagery in which this excerpt is found are omitted forclarity.)

The minor axis of an ellipse passes through the point of minimumcurvature on the elliptical edge. The curvatures at different pointsalong this edge are determined by a curvature module, and the point 120at which curvature is at a minimum is thereby identified. A tangent 122to the curve at this point is identified by the curvature module. Theminor axis of the ellipse lies along the perpendicular of this tangent,e.g., along line 124.

Sometimes, the point along an ellipse at which curvature is minimized isnot depicted in the captured imagery (e.g., due to other objectsblocking the camera's view). Even in such case, the “up-down”orientation of the cylinder can still be determined.

Consider FIG. 20, which shows the same ellipse 118 as FIG. 19, but moreoccluded. That is, the point of minimum curvature is not depicted.

In this case, the curvature module is used to detect the point ofmaximum curvature along the edge (i.e., point 126). The curvature modulethen determines a line 128 tangent to the edge at this point. Theorientation of this line typically matches the “up-down” orientation ofthe digital watermark in the product label that adjoins the curve. Asdescribed above, the system rotates the image excerpt to re-orient line128 vertically, and tries a watermark decoding operation. Ifunsuccessful, it rotates the image excerpt 180 degrees and tries again.Again, a GPU can perform a plurality of rotations of the imagery inparallel, and the system can consider certain of these in ranked order(i.e., giving first attention to those orientations at which line 128 ismost nearly vertical).

Items imaged on the conveyor belt—regardless of their configuration (canor rectangular carton, etc.) commonly are depicted with perspectivedistortion. FIG. 21 illustrates how the face of the FIG. 12 cereal box,lying face-up on the conveyor belt, might be depicted in camera imagery.(The markings used to explain watermark tiling are again included inthis depiction, but of course are not overtly visible in the cameraimagery.)

To decode the watermark, it is helpful to first restore the depiction ofthe item to its proper aspect ratio.

One approach uses image segmentation to identify different items in thefield of view. Most physical items are characterized by perpendicularedges (e.g., a cereal box is a rectangular cuboid; a can is a rightcylinder). The edges discerned from the segmented imagery are examinedto determine if any pair of edges is nearly parallel or nearlyperpendicular (i.e., within, e.g., 20, 10 or 5 degrees or less). Thephysical edges to which these depictions correspond can be assumed to betruly parallel or perpendicular, with the angular variance in thedepicted image due to perspective distortion. A corrective perspectivetransformation is then applied to restore these edges to parallel orperpendicular relationship.

While simple, this technique breaks down when the item does not havenearly straight edges (e.g., a bag of frozen peas), or if the items arearranged on the conveyor so that certain edges of an item are blockedfrom the camera's view.

Another approach simply characterizes the perspective distortion of thecamera across its field of view, in a calibration operation—before use.This information is stored, and later recalled to correct imagerycaptured during use of the system.

One calibration technique places a known reference pattern (e.g., asubstrate marked with a one-inch grid pattern) on the conveyor. Thisscene is photographed by the camera, and the resulting image is analyzedto discern the perspective distortion at each 2D location across thecamera's field of view (e.g., for each pixel in the camera's sensor).The operation can be repeated, with the calibrated reference patternpositioned at successively elevated heights above the plane of theconveyor (e.g., at increments of one inch). Again, the resulting imageryis analyzed, and the results stored for later use.

In like fashion, a vertical gridded substrate can be placedperpendicularly across the conveyor. Imagery is captured and analyzed todiscern perspective distortion in that plane. Again, the process can berepeated with the substrate moved to successive positions along theconveyor (e.g., at increments of one inch), to discern the apparentdistortion of imagery captured at such planes.

Similarly, the gridded substrate can be placed longitudinally along theaxis of the conveyor. Imagery can be captured and analyzed to discernapparent distortion of surfaces in that plane. Again, the substrate canbe moved, and the operation repeated, at successive parallel planes.

When imagery is thereafter captured of items on the conveyor, thisreference data can be consulted (and interpolated, e.g., for physicalitems presenting tilted surfaces) to discern the perspective distortionthat influences each part of the captured imagery. Correctivecounter-distortions are then applied before the imagery is passed to theidentification module.

Correction of perspective distortion is a familiar exercise in imageprocessing and photogrammetry. A variety of other techniques for image“rectification” are known in the art. (Many of the prior art techniquescan be applied in simplified form, since the camera position and opticsare typically fixed, so associated camera parameters can be determinedand employed in the correction process.) If imagery from two differentviewpoints is available, the stereo information provides still furtheropportunities for image correction.

Reference was made, above, to use of detected text as a way ofdiscerning rotation-orientation, but it is also valuable as a metric ofperspective distortion.

Most product labels use fonts in which vertical letter strokes areparallel. For example, in FIG. 29, the two vertical letter strokes inthe letter “M” of “Mixed” are parallel. Put another way, most fonts haveconsistent letter widths, top to bottom. Again in FIG. 29, the letter“M” has the same width across its bottom as across its top. (So do theletters “x” and “u” etc.)

Similarly with most straight lines of text: the letters have consistentheight. Most “tall” letters (t, k, l, etc.) and capital letters extendfrom the base text line to a first height, and any “short” letters (w,e, r, etc.) all extend to a second, lower, height. Lines along the topsand bottoms of the letters are generally parallel. (See lines “a,” “b”and “c” in the first line of text in FIG. 29.)

Divergence from these norms is useful as a measure of perspectivedistortion. When detected by a corresponding detection module, acorrective image distortion is applied to restore the lines to parallel,and to restore the widths of letters to consistent values—top to bottom.Watermark detection is then applied to the correctively-distorted image.

FIG. 30 shows that perspective warps can arise in two perpendiculardimensions, here termed “tilt” and “tip.” “Tilt” refers to a surfaceorientation that is inclined in a horizontal direction, to the right orto the left, from a straight-on, plan, view. Tilted-left refers to anorientation in which the left edge of the surface is at a greater focaldistance from the camera than the center of the object. “Tip” refers toa surface orientation that is inclined in a vertical direction. Tippedback refers to an orientation in which the top edge of the surface is ata greater focal distance from the camera than the center of the object.

FIG. 30 also shows small arrows that are intended to indicate directionsof surface-normals from the depicted cereal box. In the tilted-leftcase, the surface normal is inclined to the left—as seen by the camera.In the tipped-back case, the surface normal is inclined upwardly, asseen by the camera.

A gross sense of perspective can be obtained by reference to techniquesnoted herein, such as the text lines of FIG. 29. If the lines convergeas they move to the right, the right part of the label must be furtherfrom the camera, indicating a tilted-right pose.

Another gross sense of perspective can be obtained from the scale of thewatermark tile. Referring again to FIG. 21, if the watermark tiles aresmaller in scale towards the top of the object, this indicates the topof the object is more distant, i.e., a tipped-back pose. Other tip- andtilt-states are similarly indicated by different scales of the depictedtiles. (The scale of the preferred watermark tile is readily revealedfrom a log-polar plot of the embedded calibration signal, as detailed inU.S. Pat. No. 6,590,996.)

As indicated, if the orientation of the surface is accurately discerned(e.g., by analyzing two frames of imagery showing different viewpoints,and considering positions of keypoints in each), imagery can bedistorted so as to accurately counter-act the apparentdistortion—restoring it to a plan presentation. Object identificationcan then proceed on the basis of the corrected imagery.

If, instead of accurate orientation information, the system only hasgross orientation information (e.g., tilted left, or tipped back, suchas from fast analysis of letter shape or non-parallel lines), differentcounter-distortions can be tried. For example, if the object appears tobe tipped back, but the amount of tip is uncertain, then the objectidentification module can first try to extract a watermark from thecaptured imagery without any correction. If unsuccessful, an imageprocessing module can counter-distort the image to impose a perspectiveas if the image focal plane is tipped-forward 20 degrees (i.e.,countering the tipped-back apparent presentation). The objectidentification module again tries to extract a watermark. Ifunsuccessful, a further corrective counter-distortion is applied, e.g.,processing the original image to impose a perspective as iftipped-forward 30 degrees. The object identification module again triesto extract a watermark. If unsuccessful, a still further corrective warpis applied (e.g., imposing a perspective as if the focal plane is tippedforward 36 degrees). Etc.

Again, a GPU is well suited for such tasks—allowing the just-detailedsequence of attempts to be performed in parallel, rather than serially.

In the case of cylindrical objects, correction of cylindrical warpingmay be employed, to account for the apparent spatial compression of thepackaging artwork as the curved surface recedes from view. (Thiscorrection can be applied separately from perspective correction, or aspart of a combined operation.)

Ignoring perspective, FIG. 22 shows an isometric view of a cylindricalobject, viewed obliquely. Cylindrical distortion is at its maximum wherethe cylindrical surface curves out of view. It is at its minimum along acenter line parallel to the cylinder axis, along the part of the surfaceclosest to the camera. (This is the same line defined by extension ofthe minor axis 108 of the ellipse, discussed with FIG. 18.) If thecylinder is fully visible (i.e., it is not occluded by another item),this line of minimum cylindrical distortion bi-sects the visiblecylindrical face, as shown by the dark, long-dashed line 129 of FIG. 22.The other dashed lines—closer to the edges—are in regions ofprogressively more spatial compression, causing the lines to appearcloser together. (The dashed lines in FIG. 22 are at 20 degree spacingsaround the cylinder.)

FIG. 23 shows an excerpt of FIG. 22, as might be passed to an objectrecognition module. The cylindrical item is first segmented from thebackground. Its up-down axis is next assessed, by reference to text,edges, ellipse features, or otherwise. The image excerpt is then rotatedbased on the assessed orientation information, yielding FIG. 24.

A cylindrical warp correction is next applied, counteracting thecompression near the edges by applying a compensating horizontalexpansion. Since the image excerpt spans the full width of the cylinder,and its boundaries were detected by the image segmentation (shown as thesolid lines), a straightforward trigonometric correction function isapplied.

In particular, if the distance from center line to the edge is adistance “x,” then any intermediate distance “y” from the center linecorresponds to an curvature angle theta (θ)—from the cylinder's apparentcenter line—of arcsin (y/x). The horizontal scaling factor to be appliedat this distance from the center line is 1/cos(θ).

By such procedure, the FIG. 24 image is horizontally warped to yield acurvature-compensated FIG. 25. (The outline is no longer shown, as it isa curved shape that is difficult to reproduce. The image data wouldtypically encompass the full visible surface of the cylinder, segmentedfrom the camera's view of the conveyor, as opposed to the rectangularexcerpt illustrated.) It will be recognized that the dashed lines—atuniform angular spacings of 20 degrees, are now at uniform spatialdistances in this 2D representation. Thus, it is as if any label wereremoved from the cylindrical item, and viewed straight-on.

The compensated image data of FIG. 25 is then processed to yield objectidentification (e.g., by a watermark decoding module, etc.).

The case just-described, in which the cylindrical object isfully-viewable, and its side edges are unambiguous, is straightforward.More challenging are instances where these criteria are not met. FIG. 26is an example.

In this captured image, much of the cylinder 130—including the entiretyof one side edge, and part of the other—are occluded by item 132. Partof one side edge 134 is visible. While this edge line might be due toother features of the imagery, it is most likely the edge of cylindricalobject, because the edge detector module finds a point of intersection136 between this edge 134 and an elliptical curve 138 in the imagery.

As described above, e.g., in connection with FIGS. 13-20, thecylindrical surface is segmented from the imagery, and rotated to alikely up-down orientation, as shown in FIG. 27. (This rotation can bebased, e.g., on lettering on the cylinder, or the ellipse section 138.)The position of the edge 134 is known, but the position of the centerline of minimum distortion (corresponding to the long-dash line 129 ofFIG. 22) is uncertain. Is the center line a line 140 a that is distancex1 from the edge, or a line 140 b that is a distance x2 from the edge,or some other line?

An exhaustive search is performed, e.g., at least partly employing aGPU—assuming different locations for the center line, performing thecylindrical compensation corresponding to that assumed center line, andthen attempting to perform an item identification (e.g., by watermarkdecoding). At some assumed value of “x,” the compensation yields an itemidentification.

The exhaustive search is not unbounded. The system knows that the centerline cannot be to the right of line 142, nor to the left of line 144. Itcan't be right of line 142 because this is the mid-point of the exposedwidth 145 of the cylinder face, and the occluded portion of the cylinderis to the left. It can't be to the left of line 144, because the systemcurve-fits an ellipse 146 to the segment of the ellipse revealed in theimagery, and the center line cannot be to the left of this ellipse.(Indeed, it should be well to the right from line 144.)

The search may preferably start with an assumed center line based on thefitted ellipse 146, e.g., mid-way across its width—as shown in by line148. The system then iterates from that starting point—trying lines atincreasing distances either side of the assumed center line 148, in anattempt to extract an item identifier.

(A still simpler approach is to extend the minor axis of the fittedellipse 146, and use this as the starting point for the center line.Such approach does not work in FIG. 27 because the view in FIG. 26 onwhich FIG. 27 is based uses only one-point perspective, rather than two,so the elliptical face of the cylinder is not accurately presented: itis presented as a section of a circle.)

FIG. 28 shows a still more challenging scenario, in which the singleedge boundary 134 of FIG. 27 is also occluded. Lettering detected on theitem has been used to orient the segmented excerpt to an approximateup-down orientation.

In this case, a two-dimensional exhaustive search is done—varying boththe assumed location of the edge of the cylinder, and also its assumedcenter line. That is, the system searches across different curvaturestates (one metric is the cylinder's radius of curvature, x), andcylinder locations (one metric is the location of the cylinder axis, asviewed from the camera).

Again, since part of the elliptical edge defined by the top of the itemis detectable, the system fits an ellipse 146 to this edge, which helpsbound the location of the partially-occluded cylindrical surface. Inparticular, the system starts by assuming that the boundary edge of thecylindrical surface is on line 150—dropped from the edge of thefitted-ellipse nearest the segmented imagery. It further assumes thatthe center line of the cylindrical surface is on line 152—dropped fromthe center of the ellipse. Both are then alternately iterated from thesestarting positions.

As before, for each trial location of the boundary and center lines, thesystem applies a corresponding corrective warp to “flatten” the presumedcylinder, and then attempts object recognition using the compensatedimage excerpt.

At some limiting point in the iteration, if object identification hasnot succeeded, the attempt terminates.

It will be recognized that multiple attempts may be required to extractan identifier (e.g., a watermark) from a partially-revealed cylindricalsurface. For example, the estimated up-down orientation may need to beiterated. So, too, the assumed locations of the center line of thecurved surface, and an edge location. If perspective is not calibratedin advance, then this too may be iterated. Fortunately, given thecapability of multi-core devices, such processing can be effected withinthe typical time constraints of checkout systems.

Moreover, most item recognition technologies are robust to certain imagedistortions. For example, watermarks are commonly decoded at 50-200% oforiginal scale, and with 15 degrees or more of perspective distortion.And some watermarks are fully robust to all rotation angles (althoughdetection shortcuts may be implemented if the detector needn't considerall possible rotations). Still further, a complete watermark payload canbe extracted from a single tile of watermarked artwork, so in the caseof cylindrical objects, a small fraction of whatever surface is exposedwill often suffice for decoding. (Barcodes do not have this latteradvantage; the barcoded portion must be on the exposed surface. However,barcodes are similarly robust to rotation and scale, and presently aremore robust to perspective.)

Due to the decoding latitude afforded by such robustness, the iterativeincrements in the described embodiments can be relatively large. Forexample, in FIG. 28, the positions of lines 150 and 152 may be movedlaterally a distance equal to 20% of their spacing as an iterative step.

Some implementations may disregard cylindrical distortion, recognizingthat a complete watermark tile is less than two inches across, and theside surface of the can closest to the camera may present anaxially-oriented strip of label at least two inches in width. Althoughcurved, the cylindrical distortion of this strip is relatively small.Such implementations may prefer to apply the thereby-saved processoreffort to address perspective distortion, instead.

It will be understood that techniques like those detailed above can alsobe adapted for application to item shapes other than cylindrical.

If a conveyor is not present, and the objects are positioned before acamera system by hand, the system can compile a history (histogram)about the pose at which items are most commonly positioned for reading.That is, each time an object is successfully identified (by whatevertechnology), the system records information about the 3D orientation atwhich the object was presented to the checkout station (and, optionally,the path along which it traveled). The data may be collected on aper-cashier basis (or per-customer, for self-serve checkouts), toaccount for the different habits of different users. (Cashiers typically“sign-in” to POS systems, e.g., entering an employee ID and password ona keypad or similar device. Customers may identify themselves by loyaltycard.) Once historical object-presentation data has been collected, itcan be used to optimize the system's decoding procedure.

For example, if cashier A usually presents items to a camera systemtipped-back and tilted-left, the system can apply correctivecorresponding counter-distortions to the captured imagery—perhapswithout even analyzing the captured imagery to estimate pose. If thecashier's next-most-common presentation is tipped-back and tilted-right,then a compensation adapted to this presentation can be tried if thefirst-compensated image fails to yield an object recognition.

Conversely, if cashier B usually presents items tipped-forward andtilted left, then a different, corresponding, correction can be appliedto images captured at that cashier's station, etc.

The same techniques can be applied to conveyor-based systems. Over time,the system may discern the “canonical” way that objects are placed onthe conveyor. Image processing can account for such typical placementsby tailoring the order that different identification techniques areapplied.

Different objects may be habitually presented, or placed (on aconveyor), differently. After an object has been identified, itspresentation/placement data can be stored in association with the objectID and other identifying information, to compile a rich source ofcharacteristic presentation information on a per-item-type basis.

Cashier A may most commonly present cereal boxes tipped-back and tiltedleft, but may present 12-packs of soft drinks tipped-forward. The systemcan acquire certain identification information (e.g., straight-edges orcurvilinear shape, color histogram, temperature, weight, etc.) fromsensors, and use this information to determine the most commonpresentation pose of objects having such attributes, and apply differentimage distortions or other identification techniques accordingly basedon such sensor data.

As before, a GPU can effect multiple such image counter-distortions inparallel. When cashier A is using the system, the GPU may effect adifferent collection of image counter-distortions than when cashier B isusing the system.

In some ways, it is easier to perform product identification onconveyor-based systems than hand-scanning systems. This is because theorientation of the products typically is constrained, in some fashion,by the conveyor—easing the recognition task. For example, a can nearlyalways rests on one of its two flat ends or—less likely—is positioned onits side, with its cylindrical axis parallel to the conveyor plane. Thissubstantially limits the universe of camera views that might beencountered. Similarly, boxed-goods are regularly positioned with aplanar surface facing down. This causes the adjoining four surfaces toall extend vertically, and the top surface to be disposed in a planeparallel to the conveyor. Again, this confines the range of poses thatmay be expected. (These are examples of the canonical poses referencedearlier.)

In like fashion, a conveyor imparts common, straight-line, movement toall objects resting on it. This makes the computational task ofdiscerning surface orientations easier, since feature points recognizedfrom two images—captured by a single camera at two differentinstants—have all moved the same distance in the same direction. (If onepoint moves 100 pixels, and a second point moves 50 pixels, then thesecond point is more remote than the first, etc.)

The difficulty of conveyor-based systems is that the camera's view ofone product may be occluded by another. In contrast, hand-scanningsystems typically present a single item at a time to the camera.

While the foregoing description focused on watermark decoding, it willbe recognized that object identification by pattern recognition (e.g.,fingerprinting, product configuration, etc.) is also simplified byunderstanding the rotational and perspective state of the objectdepiction, from a normal, or reference, presentation. Thus, for example,with SURF fingerprint-based recognition, the discerned feature points ina camera image may more quickly be matched with corresponding points ina reference image if the object depiction in the camera image istransformed to correspond to that in the reference imagery.

In some embodiments, rotational orientation is not important. Forexample, the watermarking arrangement detailed in Digimarc's U.S. Pat.No. 6,590,996 is fully robust to rotation. In such embodiments,computational effort is better focused on determining the inclination ofthe object surface, and perspective distortion.

In some embodiments, information determined through one recognitiontechnology is useful to another. For example, by color histogramanalysis, the system may make a tentative identification of an item as,e.g., a six-pack of Coke. With this tentative identification, the systemcan obtain—from the database—information about the configuration of suchproduct, and can use this information to discern the pose or orientationof the product as depicted in the camera imagery. This pose informationmay then be passed to a digital watermark decoding module. Suchinformation allows the watermark decoding module to shortcut its work(which typically involves making its own estimation of spatial pose).

In another example, image fingerprinting may indicate that an item islikely one that conveys a digital watermark on its packaging. The imagefingerprinting may also provide information about the item's affinerepresentation within the captured imagery. The system may thendetermine that if the image is rotated clockwise 67 degrees, thewatermark will be easier to read (e.g., because it is then restored toits originally encoded orientation). The system performs a virtual 67degree rotation of the imagery, and then passes it to a watermarkdecoding module.

Watermark indicia—like barcode indicia—cannot be decoded properly ifthey are depicted at too great an angular skew. In accordance withanother aspect of the present technology, products for sale in a retailstore are watermarked with multiple watermarks—pre-distorted to aidoff-axis reading. In an exemplary arrangement, the watermark pattern(e.g., a watermark tile, as detailed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,590,996) isaffine-distorted eight different ways (horizontally/vertically). Theeight affine-transformed tiles are summed with the original tile, andthis composite pattern is applied to the product or its packaging. Thefollowing Table I shows the nine component watermark tiles:

TABLE I 1 Original watermark tile 2 Original tile, affine-transformed 30degrees to right 3 Original tile, affine-transformed 30 degrees toright, and 30 degrees upwardly 4 Original tile, affine-transformed 30degrees upwardly 5 Original tile, affine-transformed 30 degrees to left,and 30 degrees upwardly 6 Original tile, affine-transformed 30 degreesto left 7 Original tile, affine-transformed 30 degrees to left, and 30degrees downwardly 8 Original tile, affine-transformed 30 degreesdownwardly 9 Original tile, affine-transformed 30 degrees to right, and30 degrees downwardly

If a product surface bearing this watermark pattern is tilted up, awayfrom the camera by 45 degrees, component tile #8 in the above list stillwill be readily readable. That is, the 45 degrees of upward physicaltilt, counteracts the 30 degrees of downward affine transformation oftile #8, to yield a net apparent upward skew of 15 degrees—well withinthe reading range of watermark decoders.

(In a variant embodiment, the composite watermark tile additionally oralternatively includes component tiles of different watermark scales.Similarly, the composite watermark tile can include component tiles thathave been warped in non-planar fashion. For example, differentcurvilinear warps can be used in anticipation of sensing watermarks fromcurved surfaces, such as canned goods, viewed from differentperspectives. In some embodiments, different watermark patterns may beapplied in tiled fashion, e.g., one normal, an adjoining tile distortedto “tilt left,” another adjoining one distorted to “tilt right,” etc.)

In existing checkout stations, spinning mirrors are sometimes used toeffect physical scanning of laser beams across product packaging. Inaccordance with a further aspect of the present technology, movingmirrors are used with camera systems to introduce different distortions(e.g., perspective distortions) in imagery provided to productidentification modules.

For example, a camera may face a segmented cylinder having ninedifferent mirrored surfaces. The cylinder may be turned by a steppermotor to successively present different of the mirrors to the camera.Each mirror reflects a differently-warped view of checkout items to acamera. These different warps may be, e.g., the nine differenttransformations detailed in Table I. For one frame capture, the cylinderpresents an unwarped view of the imagery to the camera. For a next framecapture, the cylinder presents a view of the imagery as if skewed 30degrees to the right, etc. The resulting sequence of frames can beprovided, e.g., to a watermark decoder or other product identificationmodule, for generation of product identification information.

In a related embodiment, moving mirrors serve to extend a camera's fieldof view—presenting scenes to the camera sensor that are otherwiseoutside the field of view of the camera lens.

Another useful approach to identifying unknown objects (e.g., readingwatermarks from surfaces of unknown shape) is akin to a Taylor seriesexpansion. First, assume the object is planar and squarely facing thecamera. Try reading the watermark. If unsuccessful, use available datato make a best guess as to a planar slope term (e.g., tip and tilt).Apply a corrective counter-distortion based on the guessed surface slopeterm, and try reading the watermark. If unsuccessful, use available datato make a further refinement to the guess—adding a simple curvatureterm. Apply a corrective counter-distortion that is also based on theguessed curvature, and try reading the watermark. This processcontinues, each time further refining an estimate about the surfaceconfiguration, and each time trying to decode the watermark based onsuch estimate. Continue this procedure until time allocated to the taskruns out, or until all available data useful in estimating productconfiguration has been applied. (Even in this latter case, “blind”attempts at image distortions that might allow watermark decoding maystill be tried.)

Reference has been made to certain digital watermark indicia spanning asubstantial portion of the packaging. This means at least 25% of theexposed surface area of the packaging. Increased performance can beachieved by increasing the coverage, e.g., to more than 50%, 75%, 90%,or 95%, of the exposed area—in some instances reaching 100% coverage.

While reference was made to processing imagery to counteract certainapparent distortions, this operation need not be done in the spatial(pixel) domain. Instead, the imagery may first be transformed into acomplementary domain (e.g., the spatial frequency domain, or FFTdomain). The desired counter-distortion can then be applied in thiscomplementary domain.

Such arrangement is particularly favored in watermark-based objectidentification systems, because watermark decoding commonly operates onspatial-frequency domain data. The imagery can be FFT-transformed once,and then a variety of different distortions can be applied (e.g., byGPU), and each resulting set of data can be provided to a watermarkdetector. This is computationally easier than applying a variety ofdifferent distortions (e.g., by GPU) in the pixel domain, and thenhaving to perform FFTs on each of the differently-distorted image sets,to perform similar watermark decoding.

While certain embodiments made use of image frames oriented at regular15 degree increments, this is not essential. One alternative embodimentuses one frame parallel to the camera, four frames that are angled atleast 20 degrees away from the first frame (e.g., two at +/−25 degreesin a horizontal direction, and two more at +/−25 degrees in a verticaldirection), and four more frames that that are angled at least 50degrees away from the first frame (e.g., two at +/−55 degreeshorizontally, and two at +/−55 degrees vertically). This set of nineimage frames provides a good diversity of item views, allowing simplewatermark and barcode decoders to reliably decode indicia from mostsurfaces viewable from a camera—regardless of the surfaces'orientations.

Volumetric Modeling, Etc.

A further aspect of the present technology concerns identification ofitems, e.g., piled at a retail checkout.

Such an arrangement starts with 3D information about the assembledmerchandise piled at the checkout. This 3D data set can be generatedusing any of the techniques identified elsewhere herein, includingstereoscopic imaging, single camera imaging in conjunction with a movingbelt, Kinect sensor, time of flight camera, etc. FIG. 31 shows anillustrative 3D image—showing what seem to be five objects on a conveyorbelt.

This 3D information is processed to define plural component objectvolumes.

The science of reconstructing object volumes from imagery is an old one(e.g., Guzman, “Decomposition of a Visual Scene into Three-DimensionalBodies,” in Automatic Interpretation and Classification of Images,Academic Press, 1969). One of the landmarks in the field is Clowes, OnSeeing Things, Artificial Intelligence, 2:79-116 (1971).

This earlier work was followed—largely at the MIT ArtificialIntelligence Lab—by Waltz, Hoffman and others, who further refinedalgorithms for discerning component solid shapes based on informationderived from imagery. Waltz, in particular, is known for his work onexamining local properties in images (visible vertices and edges), andcombining this information with geometrical rules to identify whatpolyhedra are depicted. His use of constraint propagation overcamecombinatorial explosion problems to which certain earlier analyticmethods were prone.

This volumetric object recognition research has been widely deployed inrobotic “pick and place” applications. (“Bin picking” is a common taskin which a robot images known 3D shapes that are randomly distributed ina bin. The robot processes the imagery to identify a desired one of theshapes, and then manipulates an arm to remove the item from the bin andplace it at a desired location.)

While most such techniques rely on edge-derived geometries, somesubsequent technologies shifted to analysis of point clouds (e.g., fromrange images or depth maps), to identify component shapes based onidentification of surfaces. The recent commodification of rangingsensors (e.g., the Kinect sensor, and time of flight cameras) makes suchapproaches attractive for some implementations.

Additionally, a great deal of practical work has been done toreconstruct 3D building geometries from aerial cityscape images. Thatapplication is closely related to the retail checkout context, but on adifferent scale.

A few of the many writings detailing the foregoing include:

-   Brady, Computational Approaches to Image Understanding, MIT AI Lab,    Memo 653, 1981;-   Braun, Models for Photogrammetric Building Reconstruction, Computers    & Graphics, Vol 19, No 1, January-February 1995, pp. 109-118;-   Dowson et al, Shadows and Cracks, MIT AI Lab, Vision Group, June,    1971;-   Dowson, What Corners Look Like, MIT AI Lab, Vision Group, June,    1971;-   Fischer, Extracting Buildings from Aerial Images using Hierarchical    Aggregation in 2D and 3D, Computer Vision and Image Understanding,    Vol. 72, No 2, November 1998, pp. 185-203;-   Haala et al, An Update on Automatic 3D Building Reconstruction,    ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 65, 2010, pp.    570-580;-   Handbook of Mathematical Models in Computer Vision, N. Paragios ed.,    Springer, 2006;-   Hoffman et al, Parts of Recognition, MIT AI Lab, AI Memo 732,    December, 1983;-   Mackworth, Interpreting Pictures of Polyhedral Scenes, Artificial    Intelligence, Vol. 4, No 2, 1973, pp. 121-137;-   Mundy, Object Recognition in the Geometric Era −a Retrospective,    Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 4170, 2006, pp. 3-28;-   Shapira et al, Reconstruction of Curved-Surface Bodies from a Set of    Imperfect Projections, Defense Technical Information Center, 1977;-   Waltz, Understanding Scenes with Shadows, MIT AI Lab, Vision Group,    November, 1971; and-   Zhao, Machine Recognition as Representation and Search, MIT AI Lab,    AI Memo 1189, December, 1989.

The artisan is presumed to be familiar with the above-reviewed priorart, so it is not further detailed here.

Any of these prior art methods can be employed in the presentapplication. However, for the sake of expository clarity, the technologyis described with reference to a simple set of geometrical rules appliedto edges.

Such a process begins by identifying straight and elliptical contours(edges), and associated vertices. Known edge-finding techniques can beused. Regions (surfaces) bounded by these edges are typically regardedas object faces.

Edge finding techniques based on Canny's algorithm are commonlyemployed. (See, e.g., Canny, A Computational Approach to Edge Detection,IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 8, 1986, pp.679-714.) Canny edge finders are implemented in the popular OpenCVsoftware library, e.g., version 2.4, which also includes a multitude ofother useful tools, such as corner detectors, robust local featuredetectors, ellipse-finders, etc.

Geometrical rules are applied to identify faces that form part of thesame object. For example, as shown in FIG. 31A, if edges A and B areparallel, and terminate at opposite end vertices (I, II) of an edge C—atwhich vertices parallel edges D and E also terminate, then the regionbetween edges A and B is assumed to be a surface face that forms part ofthe same object as the region (surface face) between edges D and E.

Other rules are applied to discern locations of occluded features. Forexample, an edge that extends vertically downward, but that isinterrupted (occluded) by an edge of a surface of a different object, isassumed to extend down to a common reference plane (i.e., the plane ofthe checkout stand), on which the objects are assumed to rest. (See,e.g., lines A and B in FIG. 31A.)

Such rules typically have exceptions. For example, some rules takeprecedence over others. Consider edge F in FIG. 32. Normal applicationof the just-stated rule would indicate that edge F extends all the wayto the reference plane. However, a contrary clue is provided by paralleledge G that bounds the same object face (H). Edge G does not extend allthe way to the reference plane; it terminates at the top plane of“Object N.” This indicates that edge F similarly does not extend all theway to the reference plane, but instead terminates at the top plane of“Object N.” This rule may be stated as: parallel edges originating fromend vertices of an edge (“twin edges”) are assumed to have the samelength. That is, if the full length of one edge is known, apartially-occluded twin edge is deduced to have the same length.

Application of the above procedure to the 3D arrangement of FIG. 31results in a segmented 3D model, such as is represented by FIG. 33. Eachobject is represented by data stored in memory indicating, e.g., itsshape, size, orientation, and position. An object's shape can beindicated by data indicating whether the object is a cylinder, arectangular hexahedron, etc. The object's size measurements depend onthe shape. The size of a right cylinder, for example, can becharacterized by its diameter and its length. Orientation can bedefined—for a cylinder—by the orientation of its principal axis (in thethree-dimensional coordinate system in which the model is defined). Fora regular hexahedron, orientation can be defined by the orientation ofits longest axis. The position of the object can be identified by thelocation of an object keypoint. For a cylinder, the keypoint can be thecenter of the circular face that is nearest the origin of the coordinatesystem. For a hexahedron, the keypoint can be the corner of the objectclosest to the origin.

Comparison of the 3D image of FIG. 31 to the segmented model shown inFIG. 33 shows that the model has extrapolated structure that is unseenin the image. For example, while FIG. 31 reveals that Object 3 is acylindrical object, only a fraction of the object is actually shown; therest of the object is occluded by other shapes.

FIG. 33 has extrapolated the shape of Object 3 as being a cylinder witha length-to-diameter ratio of about 2.7. (This roughly corresponds tothe shape of a Pringles brand potato chip can.) But this shape issupposition. The only information that is known, for a fact, is theinformation captured by the sensor system and revealed in FIG. 31, i.e.,that the length-to-diameter ratio of Object 3 is 1.0 or greater. Ashorter cylinder, such as a Campbell's soup can, also meets thisdescription.

(Using known photogrammetry principles, dimensional data can beextracted from imagery captured under controlled/calibrated conditions.A supermarket checkout is such a controlled environment. In the FIG. 31case, Object 3 may be determined to have a diameter of 3 inches, and itstop surface (together with that of Object 4) may be found to be about 8inches above the reference plane.

In accordance with another aspect of the present technology, theuncertainty between what is known and what is extrapolated(assumed/supposed) is identified. In one particular implementation, thisuncertainty is communicated to a human operator, or to another elementof the data processing system. FIG. 34 shows one such manner ofcommunication to a human operator, i.e., a graphical depiction of thepile of merchandise, with a zone of high uncertainty 40 highlighted on adisplay screen (e.g., by color, bolding, flashing, etc.), so as to alerta checkout clerk about a location that may be checked for additionalmerchandise.

One possibility, depicted in FIG. 35, is that the visible cylinder(Object 3) in FIG. 31 is actually a 4″ tall can of soup, positioned atopa second can of soup that is wholly hidden.

It will be recognized that the pile of merchandise shown in FIG. 31, asmodeled in FIG. 33, has much uncertainty. For example, the human viewerwill perceive (and rules followed by the present system can indicate)that the segmented model depiction of Object 2 and Object 4 are alsouncertain. (Object 3 is probably more uncertain, since cylinders with alength-to-diameter ratio of 2.7 are relatively rare in supermarkets,whereas hexahedrons of the dimensions depicted for Objects 2 and 4 inFIG. 33 are relatively more common.)

Other segmented shapes in FIG. 33 are of relatively high certainty. Forexample, due to the prevalence of regular hexahedrons in supermarkets,and the rarity of any other shape that presents an appearance like thatof Object 1 and Object 5 without being a hexahedron, the system canassign a high certainty score to these objects as depicted in FIG. 33.

As just indicated, the system desirably applies rules to compute—foreach segmented shape in FIG. 33—a confidence metric. As additionalinformation becomes available, these metrics are revised. For example,if a second view of the pile of merchandise becomes available (e.g.,from another sensor, or because the pile moves on a conveyor), then somepreviously-occluded edges may be revealed, giving greater (or less)certainty to some of the segmented volumes in FIG. 33. In some cases,the segmented model of FIG. 33 is revised, e.g., if the additional dataincludes evidence of a new item not previously included in the model.

The confidence metric can be based, at least in part, on statisticaldata about the different products offered for sale in the supermarket.This statistical data can include dimensional information, as well asother data—such as historical sales volumes per item. (If thesupermarket sells 100 cans of Pringles potato chips in a month, and 2000cans of Campbell's soup, then the confidence score for Object 3 will belower than if the sales volumes for these items were reversed.)

The particular formula for computing a confidence metric will depend onthe particular implementation, and the available data. One particularformula comprises an equation in which different metrics are weighted todifferent degrees in accordance with their importance, and combined,e.g., in a polynomial expression.

The following exemplary confidence metric equation uses input data M1,M2, M3 and M4 to yield a score S for each segmented object. Factors A,B, C, D and exponents W, X, Y and Z can be determined experimentally, orby Bayesian techniques:

S=(A*M1)^(W)+(B*M2)^(X)+(C*M3)^(Y)+(D*M4)^(Z)

The uncertainty zone shown in FIG. 34, which is brought to the attentionto the human clerk (or other system component), can bethreshold-defined, using the computed confidence metric. For example, ifObject 3 has a confidence metric of 20 (on a scale of 1-100), and ifObjects 1, 2, 4 and 5 have confidence metrics of 97, 80, 70 and 97,respectively, then the uncertainty zone is as depicted in FIG. 34 if thethreshold is set to highlight uncertainty zones associated with objectshaving confidence metrics less than 50.

However, if the threshold is set at 75, then a further uncertaintyzone—associated with Object 4, would also be highlighted.

(In a variant embodiment, a binary approach to uncertainty is adopted.Segmented shapes either have certainty or they don't. For example, inFIG. 33, Objects 1 and 5 may be determined to be certain, while Objects2, 3 and 4 are not. Uncertainty zones associated with the latter areflagged, e.g., for possible follow-up.

In accordance with a further aspect of the present technology, thesystem's assessments about the different segmented shapes are refined byreference to other sensor data. That is, the system employs otherinformation to help refine an evidence-based determination, e.g., aboutcertainty or shape.

Consider Object 4, which is largely occluded in FIGS. 31 and 33. Scaleinformation extracted from the imagery may indicate this item has aplanar (top) face measuring about 2.2″×6″. Many items in the supermarketinventory meet this criteria. However, if imagery is also available froman infrared camera, this item may be found to be at a temperature belowfreezing. Many boxed frozen vegetables (e.g., spinach) have a planarsurface of this dimension, but such products commonly do not have a longdimension of 8″, as extrapolated in FIG. 33. Based on the additionalevidence contributed by the thermal image data, the system may reducethe confidence score for Object 4, e.g., from 70 to 40.

A great variety of other information can be used in this mannerConsider, for example, that the image of FIG. 31 may revealidentification markings on the cylindrical face of Object 3 exposed inthat view. Such markings may comprise, for example, a barcode, ordistinctive markings that comprise a visual fingerprint (e.g., usingrobust local features). A barcode database may thereby unambiguouslyidentify the exposed cylindrical shape as a 10.5 oz. can of Campbell'sCondensed Mushroom Soup. A database of product information—which may bethe barcode database or another (located at a server in the supermarketor at a remote server)—is consulted with such identificationinformation, and reveals that the dimensions of this Campbell's soup canare 3″ in diameter and 4″ tall. In this case, the model segmentationdepicted in FIG. 33 is known to be wrong. The cylinder is not 8″ tall.The model is revised as depicted in FIG. 36. The certainty score ofObject 3 is increased to 100, and a new, wholly concealed Object 6 isintroduced into the model. Object 6 is assigned a certainty score of0—flagging it for further investigation. (Although depicted in FIG. 36as filling a rectangular volume below Object 3 that is presumptively notoccupied by other shapes, Object 6 can be assigned different shapes inthe model.) For example, Objects 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 can be removed fromthe volumetric model, leaving a remaining volume model for the spaceoccupied by Object 6 (which may comprise multiple objects or, in someinstances, no object).

A task list maintained by the system is updated to remove identificationof Object 3 from identification tasks to be completed. That part of thepile has been identified with sufficient certainty. Knowing its shape,the geometrical model of the pile is updated, and the system continueswith other identification tasks.

The position of a barcode (or other marking) on an object is additionalevidence—even if the captured imagery does not permit such indicia toidentify the object with certainty. For example, if a hexahedral shapeis found to have has a barcode indicia on the smallest of threedifferently-sized faces, then candidate products that do not have theirbarcodes on their smallest face can be ruled out—effectively pruning theuniverse of candidate products, and increasing the confidence scores forproducts that have barcodes on their smallest faces.

Similarly, the aspect ratio (length-to-height ratio) of barcodes variesamong products. This information, too, can be sensed from imagery andused in pruning the universe of candidate matches, and adjustingconfidence scores accordingly.

(As suggested by the foregoing, the processing system may maintainmultiple identification hypotheses about each item in the pile. Forexample, the system may separately compute confidence scores that thecylindrical shape in FIG. 31 is a particular can of soup, or aparticular can of potato chips. Some evidence may increase or decreaseboth scores in tandem (e.g., thermal camera data indicating the cylinderis cold, or at room temperature). But other evidence will tend toincrease confidence in one hypothesis, and reduce confidence inanother.)

FIG. 6 shows some of the sensor-derived evidence that the system mayconsider in developing and refining hypotheses regarding productidentification.

As another example of how the system's assessments about the differentsegmented shapes can be refined by reference to other sensor data,consider weight data. Where the weight of the pile can be determined(e.g., by a conveyor or cart weigh scale), this weight can be analyzedand modeled in terms of component weights from individual objects—usingreference weight data for such objects retrieved from a database. Whenthe weight of the identified objects is subtracted from the weight ofthe pile, the weight of the unidentified object(s) in the pile is whatremains. This data can again be used in the evidence-based determinationof which objects are in the pile. (For example, if one pound of weightin the pile is unaccounted for, items weighing more than one pound canbe excluded from further consideration.)

It will be recognized that the above-described technology can beconceived, in one respect, as growing a model of known objects—addingobjects as they are identified. An alternate conception is to model anunknown pile, and then subtract known objects from the model as theobjects are identified.

An initial model of a total 3D volume presented for checkout can begenerated based on sensed data (e.g., imagery). When an object in thepile is identified (e.g., by product markings, such as byfingerprinting, barcode, text OCR, or through use of other evidence),the object's shape (volume) is obtained from reference data stored in adatabase. The object's orientation (pose) is next determined—if notalready known). Again, this may be done by comparing sensor data (e.g.,showing edges, product markings, etc.) with reference information storedin a database. Once the object orientation is known, that object'sshape—correspondingly oriented—is virtually subtracted from the 3Dvolumetric model. (Its weight may also be subtracted from the unknownpile weight, if weight information is known.) This process proceeds forall identifiable objects. The remaining volume is then checked forhidden objects, or an output signal can be issued, alerting that thepile needs to be spread out to reveal hidden contents.

For any method based on extracting geometrical edges from luminanceimages, there is a need to distinguish geometrical edges from patternedges. One approach is to use range images/depth maps (in addition to,or in lieu of, intensity images) to avoid confusion arising fromprinting and other markings on the faces of objects.

While the above-detailed geometrical edge-based, rule-based procedurefor segmenting 3D data into component volumes is a simple way ofidentifying conventional shapes, other items encountered in supermarketscan have less conventional shapes—such as egg cartons. These shapes canbe defined by stored reference data (templates, akin to CAD-like models)to which the image processing system can resort for identificationpurposes, e.g., using known bin-picking object identificationarrangements. In one such arrangement, the 3D imagery is searched forthe various templates in a store's catalog, to determine whether anysuch item is at least partially visible in the pile. Such procedure canbe applied before, or after, the rule-based segmentation of conventionalshapes.

Further Remarks Concerning Conveyors

Reference was made, above, to various innovations associated withconveyors at retail checkouts. Most conveyor innovations may be regardedas falling into one of three classes: (1) aids in object recognition, toincrease through-put and accuracy; (2) new features for the shopper; and(3) benefits for advertisers.

In the first class, markings on the conveyor can serve to identify theplane on which the objects rest—a helpful constraint in productrecognition and object segmentation. The markings can also serve toidentify the velocity of the conveyor, and any variations. Relatedly,the markings can serve as spatial references that help with poseestimation. In some embodiments, the markings serve as focus orcalibration targets for one or more of the imaging systems. Such spatialreference information is also helpful to establish correspondencebetween information derived by different identification technologies(e.g., watermark and barcode).

Among new features for the shopper, such conveyor markings can define alane (FIG. 8) on which the shopper can place coupons. The system isalert to this lane, and examines any imagery found there as candidatecoupon imagery. When detected, the system responds according to knownprior art coupon-processing methods.

A user may place a smartphone in this lane, with the display facing up.A coupon-redemption app on the smartphone may cyclically presentdifferent screens corresponding to different coupons collected by theuser (e.g., by scanning promotions in the store, or in a newspaper, orsent to the smartphone electronically—such as by Groupon, etc.). As eachcoupon is successfully read by the checkout system (e.g., sensed by acamera, or with the coupon information otherwise-conveyed), the checkoutsystem signals such success to the smartphone. This signal can comprisea beep of a particular tone, or other audible acknowledgement.Alternatively, another type of signal can be used (e.g., optical, radio,etc.). When the smartphone receives this signal, it then presents a nextcoupon to the checkout system (e.g., on its display). This processcontinues until all coupons available on the smartphone that arerelevant to the merchandise being checked-out have been presented andacknowledged.

The check-out system camera can discern that the phone is on theconveyor belt—and not simply held over it—because its velocity matchesthat of the belt. The smartphone may automatically start thepresentation of coupons (e.g., it may activate the coupon redemptionapp) in response to input from its sensors, e.g., sensing motion along ahorizontal plane using its accelerometers, or sensing certain strobedillumination characteristic of a checkout lane using its front-facingcamera, etc.

Conversely, the user's smartphone on the moving belt can collect visualinformation projected onto the conveyor by the projector. Thisinformation can represent discount coupons, redeemable at a subsequentvisit for merchandise related to that being purchased by the consumer.(Such information can likewise be conveyed to the smartphone by audio,radio, or other communication technology.)

The conveyor can serve as a projection screen, onto which imagery isprojected by, e.g., an overhead projector. (Typically, the projector isobliquely angled towards the conveyor, with corrective optics toredress, e.g., keystoning.) As objects on the conveyor are recognized,the projector can present related information, such as item name andprice, other suggested purchases, related recipes, digital coupons, etc.The projected imagery desirably follows the associated items as theytravel along the conveyor.

The user can touch any of the indicia projected onto the conveyor. Acamera senses the user's action (e.g., a camera adjacent the conveyorthat captures imagery for item recognition, or a camera positioned withthe projector). The system understands the camera-sensed action toindicate user interest in the touched indicia. Several responses may betriggered.

One simply is to freeze the projected indicia in place relative to theuser (while the belt and items advance). This allows, e.g., the user tocapture an image of the indicia with a personal device, e.g., asmartphone. (This allows the user later to explore the presentedinformation, e.g., pursuing web links indicated by digital watermarksencoded in the projected indicia.)

Another system response is to present a video to the user. The video canbe projected at a stationary location, such as on the conveyor (whichmay continue to advance under the projected video) or on a displayscreen (e.g., a screen on which the user's purchases are tallied).

Another response is to credit a coupon discount to the amount owed bythe consumer. By presenting cash-back coupons to the consumer as itemsare being checked-out, the consumer can be incented to watch theconveyor (or other device where information is presented). Much of theprojected information may be promotional in nature, and the viewer'sattention can be maintained by periodically presenting a coupon.

The projected indicia can be text, a logo, machine-readable data (e.g.,barcode or watermark), etc. It may comprise a video.

For advertisers, the conveyor belt can be printed with brand messages,or carry temporary stickers for different branding events. In someinstances the belt is dynamically printed each cycle, and wiped cleanduring its under-counter return. Known “white board” and “dry erase”markings can be used.

Further Improvements

The sensor evidence considered in identifying items being purchasedneedn't be collected at the checkout station. Consider, for example, animplementation in which the shopper's track through the store ismonitored, such as by an indoor location technology (e.g., using a unitcarried by the shopper or the shopper's cart to sense or emit signalsfrom which location is determined, e.g., sensing a different flicker ormodulation of LED lighting in different aisles, or other form oflocation-related signaling), or by ceiling-, floor- or shelf-mountedcameras or other sensors, etc. If the shopper stops for 15 seconds infront of the Campbell's soup shelf, this data helps reinforce ahypothesis that the cylindrical shape revealed in FIG. 31 is a can ofsoup—even if no barcode or other identifying information can bediscerned from imagery captured at checkout.

Sometimes confidence scores can be revised based on the lack of certainevidence. For example, if the shopper's path through the store did notgo down the aisle containing the Pringles potato chips, this tends toincrease a confidence score that the cylindrical object is a soup can.(As is evident, certain embodiments of this technology rely on adatabase or other data store with information about the layout of thestore, indicating locations of the different products in the store'sinventory.)

Thus, knowing locations in the store visited by the shopper, and moreparticularly—knowing where the shopper or the shopper's cart paused inthe store, is useful information is deducing the identity of items inthe cart. Still better is knowing those locations in the store where anitem was placed into the cart. (The introduction of an item into thecart can be sensed in various ways, including a cart weight sensor, acamera, an array of break-beam photo sensors that senses a hand or otheritem passing through a plane into the volume of the cart, photosensorsthat detects shadowing by a new item (or by the user's hand/arm, etc.)as it is moved into the cart, etc.)

A related class of evidence comes from inventory sensors. Cameras,weight transducers, near field chip readers, or other sensors can bepositioned to monitor the removal of stock from shelves. If a ceilingmounted camera, imaging the soup shelves, captures video or periodicimagery revealing that a can of Campbell's Condensed Chicken Noodle Soupleaves the shelf at around 10:30 a.m., this tends to increase theconfidence score that a cylindrical shape sensed at a checkout stationat 10:40 a.m. is a can of Campbell's Condensed Chicken Noodle Soup.(This datum would increase the confidence score less for a cylindricalshape sensed at a checkout station at 11:10 a.m., and perhaps not at allfor a cylindrical shape sensed at a checkout station at 2:00 p.m. Thatis, the analytic weight given to the data varies in accordance with atime-related factor.)

Data from such an inventory sensor, indicating removal of a can ofchicken soup at 10:30 a.m., in conjunction with data from a locationsensor—indicating presence of the shopper at the soup shelves at 10:30,is even stronger evidence that the cylindrical shape in the shopper'spile is a can of chicken soup.

In some instances, inventory-tracking cameras are positioned orotherwise designed to avoid capturing imagery or other information aboutshoppers in the aisle, to avoid certain privacy concerns. Imagery fromsuch cameras may be presented on public displays in the aisles orelsewhere in the store, to put shoppers at ease.

The foregoing has just touched on a few of the multiple sensors that canprovide product-identifying evidence. A more lengthy, but stillincomplete, list of technologies that can aid in product identification(and in discriminating between candidate products) includes: forced air(e.g., sensing disruption of air blown through a pile, as indicative ofits contents—including change in its temperature, which can indicate aconcealed frozen item), vibration (e.g., sensing resulting productmovement and/or inertia, which can be indicative of density, and sensingsound, which can also be distinctive), other acoustic sensing (e.g.,passing item surface past a pointed stylus, or vice versa, and analyzingthe sound produced), ultrasonic excitation and imaging, radiographicscreening (e.g., ultrasonic or millimeter wave scanning, such as is doneby TSA equipment at airport security stations), light-polarizationsensing (e.g., to reduce certain reflections and to help assess surfacetexture), other optical texture sensing, motion sensing (e.g.,accelerometers), UV/IR cameras, watermarks, RFID/NFC chip sensing,weight sensing, shopper demographic sensing (e.g., by camera, or byreference to loyalty card profile), thermal time constants (e.g., howquickly a warm area caused by manual handling decays in temperature,haptic sensing (e.g., rubber membrane that deforms as items are placedonto it), time of flight cameras, chemical and olfactory sensing, gazetracking (e.g., sensing that shopper is looking at Campbell's condensedchicken noodle soup; tracking of a checkout clerk's gaze can be used toidentify salient points in captured imagery—such as the locations ofproduct barcodes; Google Glass goggles can be used in gaze tracking),sensing pose of hand as shopper or clerk grasps an item, inertialmodeling (heavy items are moved along a different track than lightthings), shopper's purchasing history (shopper prefers Coke to Pepsi,buys milk weekly, bought a 24-pack of paper towels last week so isunlikely to buy paper towels for a while), statistical item correlations(when a shopper buys spaghetti noodles, the shopper often buys spaghettisauce too), crowdsourced human identification by Amazon Turk service orthe like (e.g., relaying imagery of an otherwise unidentified product toone or more human evaluators for assessment), etc., etc.

The technologies detailed herein can utilize data collected from sensorsat a variety of locations, including from the product itself (e.g.,packaging includes certain wirelessly-coupled sensors), from storeshelves, from ceilings (looking down onto aisles or shelves), inshopping carts, carried or worn by shoppers, at point of sale stations,associated with checkout conveyors, carried/worn by clerks or shoppers,in bagging areas, etc.

Such collected information is used in a data fusion manner, tosuccessively narrow a universe of possible product identifications.Probabilistic modeling can often be employed (e.g., using Bayesianclassifier, boosted tree, or random forest approaches).

Thus an exemplary supermarket system uses a multi-feature productidentification procedure—the components of which contribute differentevidence to a decision module that tests different productidentification Bayesian hypotheses until one emerges as the winner.

One component of the supermarket's system may provide volumetric productconfiguration (shape) information. Another component may provide colorhistogram data generated from RGB imagery depicting the products.Another may provide barcode data (which may be incomplete or ambiguous).Another may contribute digital watermark data. Another may provideNFC/RFID information. Another may provide image fingerprint data.Another may contribute recognized text (OCR) data. Another maycontribute weight information (e.g., from a conveyor weigh scale).Another may contribute item temperature information (e.g., discernedfrom infrared camera imagery or air temperature). Another may provideinformation about relative placement of different items (a consumer ismore likely to put a 12-pack of soda on top of a bag of dog food than ontop of a bag of potato chips). Others may contribute informationgathered in the shopping aisles. Etc. Not all such information may bepresent for all items, depending on item characteristics, the manner inwhich the items are arrayed on a conveyor, availability of sensors, etc.

Outputs from plural such components are provided to a decision modulethat determines which product identification is most probably correct,giving the ensemble of input information. (FIG. 6.)

By such an arrangement, collected evidence is used to refine theconfidence scores of the different objects seen, or deduced to be,presented for checkout, until all are identified within a givencertainty (e.g., in excess of 99.99%). After all evidence is considered,any object(s) not identified with such accuracy is indicated for manualexamination by a clerk, or is mechanically diverted from the pile forfurther evidence collection (e.g., by imaging, weighing, etc.)

In some embodiments, a projector can project information onto the pileof items to convey information. For example, the projector can projectprice information onto (or near) items as they are identified, to assurethe customer that the price charged is as expected. Additionally, oralternatively, the projector can illuminate products in green (or someother distinctive fashion) after they have been successfully identified.Red can indicate products (or areas in the pile) about which the systemis uncertain. A checkout clerk can thus examine the pile and removeanything illuminated in red for additional imaging (or other sensing),or simply scatter the pile to expose additional product faces forimaging, until the system has recognized all the items and the pile isuniformly illuminated in green.

Some arrangements have no checkout counter; items are moved (e.g., bythe shopper) directly from a shopping cart (basket) to a bag. A systemaccording to the present technology can monitor the space between thecart and the bag, and can sense one or more types of data from objectsas they pass, to effect identification (sometimes in conjunction withpreviously-acquired information).

Shopping bags, and/or the bagging area, may also be enhanced to aididentification. For example, bags may be provided with features to aidin item recognition/identification—such as markers to assist indetermining object pose.

Moreover, bags or the bagging area may also be equipped with sensors toaid identification. For example, a bag may be suspended from hooksallowing the weight of the bag to be sensed. A bag may also bepositioned (e.g., hung or sat) in an instrumented area, with one or moresensors for collecting object identification data. The bags may be madeof a material that is functionally transparent to the sensing technology(e g, millimeter wave scanning, or UV/IR illumination), so that data canbe sensed from the bag's contents from one or more external sensors.Alternatively, sensors may be placed inside the bag. In one particulararrangement, sensors are removably placed inside the bag. For example, aframe structure, comprising four vertically-oriented planar memberscoupled at their vertical edges, and defining a regular hexahedralvolume—just smaller than that of the bag itself, is lowered into anempty bag (e.g., a fabric bag brought by the shopper). One or morepanels of this frame is instrumented with one or more sensors. Items arethen placed into the bag, by placing them within the frame structure.The sensor(s) acquires data from the items as they are placed—or as theyrest—within the structure. After data has been collected by the sensors,the frame instrumented structure is lifted and removed from thebag—ready for re-use in another bag. With the declining cost of sensors,a bag brought by the shopper may itself be permanently equipped withsensors, which are polled at the bagging station for sensed data by thestore computer system.

The order in which a human places items in a bag can also be used asevidence of item-identification. For example, the system may identify(e.g., by barcoding) a package of hamburger buns that is placed into thebottom of a bag. If a large shape is next placed into the same bag, thesystem can deduce that this next object is not a heavy object—such as asix-pack of soft drinks. More likely is that the large object is a lightweight item—such as a pack of paper towels.

If a shopper's items are identified before being bagged, the system cansuggest to the shopper—or a clerk—a rational bag-packing strategy. Aprocedure based on stored rule data can be followed. For example, thesystem can first determine the aggregate weight and volume of theshopper's items, and apply the stored rules to determine a number ofbags required to hold such a weight/volume of items. Similarly, given Nbags (e.g., three), the rules can indicate which items should be placedin the bottom of each bag (e.g., the heaviest or mostcrush-resistant/crush-tolerant items). Likewise, the rules can determinewhich items should be placed in the top of each bag (light items and themost crush-sensitive items). As a consequence of these determinations,the system can indicate which items should be placed in the middle ofeach bag. Other rules may lead to frozen and refrigerated items beingplaced together, and remote from items that may be frost damaged (andremote from deli items that may be warm). Etc. The suggestions may takethe form of voiced instructions. Alternatively, projected light ofdifferent colors can illuminate different items, signaling that theyshould next be placed in bags that are similarly identified by color. Inessence, such arrangement is a bagging expert system.)

A weight sensor in a cart may be used not just to weigh an item as it isplaced into the cart (i.e., by sensing the before-after difference inweight); it can likewise be used to weigh an item as it is removed fromthe cart (again by reference to the weight difference).

Some implementations of the technology are self-learning. For example,the detailed system can statistically track data that—in the aggregate,begins to reveal clues for product identification. A data driven modelfor product identification thus evolves through exposure to additionaldata. The system may discern, for example, that a shopper who passesthrough the frozen foods aisle at the beginning of a fifteen minuteshopping visit, is less likely to have a frozen food item presented forcheckout than a shopper who passes through the frozen foods aisle at theend of such a shopping visit. Such probabilistic models can beconstructed by humans, but are more readily—and accurately—developed byanalysis of historical shopping data.

Information collected by distributed sensors (e.g., in carts, shelves,and/or ceilings, etc.) can be used, in conjunction with shopping listdata received from consumers, to aid in traffic management through thestore. If the system finds a “milk” entry is found on the lists of fiveshoppers, it can suggest routes through the store for the differentshoppers that allow them to pick up other items on their respectivelists, and arrive at the milk cooler in time-staggered fashion—avoidinga bottleneck as one shopper carefully studies carton expiration dateswhile others wait.

The artisan will recognize that shoppers can be identified in variousknown ways, including loyalty cards, routine radio emissions fromsmartphones, smartphone apps that exchange data with a store computer,facial recognition and other camera-based techniques, etc.

Existing checkout systems commonly issue an audible signal (e.g., abeep) to confirm successful reading of a barcode. In accordance withanother aspect of the present technology, the system issues differentaudible signals—depending on the manner of product identification. If aproduct is identified by barcode reading, one type of beep is issued(e.g., 250 milliseconds of 523 Hz signal). If the product is identifiedby digital watermark decoding, a second type of beep is issued (e.g.,400 milliseconds of 660 Hz signal). If the product is identified byfingerprint recognition, a third type of beep is issued (e.g., 500milliseconds of 784 Hz signal).

Of course, these signals are exemplary only; any different signals canbe used (including signals that are sequences of beeps—either all of thesame frequency, or of different frequencies).

If item recognition is based on several different types of object data,still other signals can be used. Alternatively, a signal indicating theidentification technology that served as a primary basis foridentification can be issued.

Watermarks will gain deployment gradually in supermarkets. As withbarcodes, some time will pass before all items are watermark-encoded.The different audible feedback signals noted above will help train thecheckout staff about which types of product identification are typicallysuccessful with which types of products. For example, if a cashierlearns, by repeated exposure, that boxes of Kleenex tissues always issuea barcode “beep” and not a watermark “beep,” then the cashier will learnto slow down with such items, and be sure that the barcode on Kleenexboxes is oriented towards the sensing device. On the other hand, if thecashier learns that General Mills cereal boxes are reliably read bywatermark recognition, then these items may be passed more quicklythrough checkout, since the cashier has confidence that they will beread regardless of orientation.

While certain embodiments discern the geometrical pose of componentpatches on items being checked-out, and then process the imagerydepicting such patches so as to yield processed imagery showing thepatches as if presented squarely to the camera, in other embodiments,this latter action is not necessary. Instead, the discerned poseinformation can be provided to the system module that derives productidentification information. Such module can then work with the originalimagery, expecting its geometrically distorted state, and discerning theidentification information taking such distortion into account.

In some of the detailed embodiments, the geometrical pose informationfor component surfaces on products/packaging is discerned from thecamera imagery. In other implementations, the pose information can bedetermined otherwise. One such alternative is to use the MicrosoftKinect sensor device to sense the 3D environment. Tools extending theuse of such device far beyond its original gaming application are nowwidely available. Microsoft, for example, distributes a softwaredevelopment kit (“Kinect for Windows SDK”) that enables programmers touse the sensor's various capabilities in arbitrary applications. Opensource drivers for the Kinect sensor are available from AdafruitIndustries and PrimeSense, Ltd. In a further aspect of the presenttechnology, such a sensor is used in assessing the pose of productsurfaces at a supermarket checkout.

Unlike some other pose-assessment arrangements, the Kinect sensor doesnot rely on feature extraction or feature tracking. Instead, it employsa structured light scanner (a form of range camera) that works bysensing the apparent distortion of a known pattern projected into anunknown 3D environment by an infrared laser projector, and imaged by amonochrome CCD sensor. From the apparent distortion, the distance toeach point in the sensor's field of view is discerned.

Microsoft researchers have demonstrated use of a movable Kinect sensorto generate a volumetric model of an unknown space (Azadi et al,KinectFusion: Real-Time Dynamic 3D Surface Reconstruction andInteraction, Article 23, SIGGRAPH 2011). The model relies oncontinually-tracking 6DOF information about the sensor (e.g., definingits X-, Y-, and Z-position, and its pitch/roll/yaw orientation, byauxiliary sensors), and uses this information—with the depth data outputfrom the moving range sensor system—to generate a 3D model of the space.As the sensor is moved, different views of the scene and objects arerevealed, and these are incorporated into the evolving 3D model.

In Kinect-related embodiments of the present technology, the sensortypically is not moved. Its 6DOF information is fixed. Instead, theitems on the checkout conveyor move. Their motion is typically in asingle dimension (along the axis of the conveyor), simplifying thevolumetric modeling. As different surfaces become visible to the sensor(as the conveyor moves), the model is updated to incorporate thenewly-visible surfaces. The speed of the conveyor can be determined by aphysical sensor, and corresponding data can be provided to the modelingsystem.

In addition to providing pose information for component item surfaces,such arrangement provides an additional manner of productidentification—by volumetric product configuration. As noted, someexisting products have distinctive shapes, and packaging for othersreadily could be tailored to impart a distinctive product configuration.Even features as small as 1 mm in size can be discerned by suchvolumetric modeling, allowing logos and other distinctive markings to bepresented on products/packaging in raised embossing, or depressedengraving, fashion. Volumetric data from an item can be used, atcheckout, for product identification—matching against a catalog ofreference volumetric product configuration data (in a manner akin topresent use of image fingerprinting for product identification).

In an implementation that uses the Kinect sensor for pose determinationand/or volumetric configuration sensing, the Kinect RGB camera can beused as the sensor for capturing imagery from which other productidentification information is determined. In such embodiments a checkoutconveyor can be marked with volumetrically-sensible features, such asraised grooves or other prominences, embossed logos, etc. Such featurescan be used in a manner akin to the conveyor markings described earlier.

Volumetric modeling can also be performed without a Kinect-like sensor.With two or more different views of an item, or of items on a checkoutconveyor, a 3D model of the depicted item(s) can be produced.

In many implementations, volumetric modeling is not used independentlyfor product identification. Instead, it is one aspect of the above-notedmulti-feature identification procedure—the components of whichcontribute different evidence to a decision module that tests differentproduct identification Bayesian hypotheses until one emerges as thewinner.

As described above, outputs from plural such components are provided toa decision module that determines which product identification is mostprobably correct, giving the ensemble of input information. This modulecan rely on reference information about products in the store'sinventory, stored in a database or other data structure. It can likewiserely on analysis rules, stored in similar fashion. These rules may causethe module to accord the different input information with differentevidentiary weight, depending on circumstances and candidate itemidentifications.

For example, if a weight sensor indicates an item weighs 12 ounces, therules can specify that this is highly probative that the item is not a40 pound bag of dog food. However, the rules may indicate that suchinformation is of little value in determining whether the item is a canof corn or beans (for which the stored rules may indicate colorhistogram data has a greater discriminative value). Similarly, if acylindrical carton is sensed to have a temperature below freezing, thisis strong collaborating evidence that the item may be a container of icecream, and is negating evidence that the item is a container of oats.

In one illustrative implementation, the decision module performs astaged analysis. Tests that are fastest, and/or simplest, are performedearly, and are used to rule-out large numbers of possible items from thestore's catalog of inventory. For example, if the weigh scale indicatesa weight of one pound, all items having weights above three pounds maybe disqualified immediately (e.g., six- and twelve-packs of soda, largecontainers of liquid detergent, 40 pound bags of dog food, etc.). Teststhat are highly discriminative, e.g., having the potential to identify asingle item out of the store's catalog (analysis of captured data fordigital watermark and barcode information is of this sort), may also beapplied early in the staged process.

Generally speaking, a minority of the products in a supermarket comprisemost of the sales volume. Coke is seen frequently on checkout counters;not so with smoked oysters and obscure ethnic condiments. Desirably, thecheckout system is optimized for recognition of the products thatconstitute most of the volume. Thus, for example, the analysis rules inthe embodiment of FIG. 6 may be selected, and ordered, to most quicklyidentify the most popular grocery items.

Such a system may be self-learning. A new product may be recognized,initially, by an express identifier, such as a watermark or a barcode.Through repeated exposure, the system collects information about imagefingerprints, weights, color histograms, temperature, etc., that itassociates with such product. Later, the system becomes able torecognize the item even without reference to the original identifier. Insome staged recognition systems, data from one stage of the analysis isused in determining an order of a later part of the analysis. Forexample, information captured in the first stage of analysis (e.g.,color histogram data) may indicate that the item is probably a carton ofDiet Coke product, but may leave uncertain whether it is a 6-pack or a12-pack. This interim result can cause the analysis next to consider theitem weight. If the item weighs between 9 and 10 pounds, it can beidentified as highly likely to be a 12-pack carton of Diet Coke. If theitem weighs half that amount, it can be identified as highly likely tobe a 6-pack. (If it weighs less than 4.5 pounds, the initialidentification hypothesis is strongly refuted.)

In contrast, if the initial histogram indicates the product is likely acarton of Reese's product, but leaves uncertain whether the cartoncontains ice cream bars or peanut butter cups, a temperature check maynext be considered to most quickly reach a reliable item identification.

The rules data consulted by the decision modulation assign weightingvalues to different evidentiary parameters and different items. Thesevalues are used to determine an evolving probabilistic certainty that atentative product identification is correct. When the decision modulehas considered enough evidence to make a product identification with aprobabilistic certainty exceeding a threshold value (e.g., 99.99%),further analysis is skipped, the module outputs the productidentification, and it can then consider a next item in the checkout. Ifall of the available evidence is considered, and the threshold certaintyvalue is not met, this circumstance can be flagged to a human operator(e.g., providing an image of the item and/or other associated iteminformation) for follow-up.

In a related implementation, a voting arrangement is used, withdifferent identification technologies each casting virtual votes fordifferent item identifications. The votes of some identificationtechnologies may be more heavily weighted than others, reflecting theirgreater granularity of identification, or reliability of identification.The item identification with the most votes wins.

In some embodiments, an item that is not reliably identified—afterconsideration of all the available evidence, is physically diverted sothat the flow of subsequent items through the checkout procedure is notstopped while the troublesome item is manually examined Such diversioncan be by an arrangement such as compressed air, a diverting arm, or atrap door.

It will be recognized that smartphone apps (and the successors tosmartphones and their apps) can be adapted to cooperate with andsupplement (e.g., in terms of sensor data collection and dataprocessing) the detailed systems. For example, a shopper may maintain ashopping list on the smartphone, which list data is shared with thestore computer (perhaps in advance of the shopper's visit) to aid in theshopping experience. (An entry of an item on a shopper's electronic listis still additional evidence that can be used in identifying itemspresented for checkout. Indeed, the list can comprise a suitable set ofinitial identification hypotheses about items in that shopper's checkoutpile.)

Relatedly, data can be captured at home and used in connection withshopping. For example, Tupperware and other re-usable food containerscan be equipped with sensors, e.g., that provide data about the weight,chemical/smell, and appearance of their contents. A camera/illuminatorin a lid of such a container can apply object recognition techniques tovisually distinguish different products (e.g., popcorn, sugar, nuts,flour, etc.). Existing containers may be retro-fit with sensor-equippedlids. Such devices can be self-powered (e.g., by battery), or energizedbased on parasitic excitation from another source. Such deviceswirelessly communicate with other such devices, or with a computer, viaa mesh or other network. A cookie container may have its own socialnetworking presence (e.g., a Facebook or Twitter account)—informinghumans or other data consumers about its fill level, when lastrefreshed, when last opened (and by whom), etc. When the inventory ofsuch a monitored food product falls below a threshold (which may bedetermined by the historical inventory level at which the container hasbeen re-filled in the past), that food item can be added to the user'sshopping list.

Similarly, in a social network vein, when a consumer adds a food item toa shopping list, or when such item is added to the consumer's shoppingcart, this information may be published by social network channels(e.g., Facebook or Twitter). This information may be made available(with the consumer's permission) to companies that want to market to theconsumer. To illustrate, if Tony puts a can of Campbell's soup on hislist or in his cart, this information—or the opportunity to respond toit—may be offered to Campbell's and its competitors (e.g., GeneralMills' Progresso soups). For example, in an automated auction, thesedifferent companies may bid increasing amounts of cash (or otherconsideration) to determine which—if any—gets to interact with Tony, orgets access to certain of Tony's demographic profile data for marketingor research purposes. (The consideration may be split between Tony andthe store.) The interaction may come via a display screen in the cart orat the checkout station, via a portable device carried by Tony, viaimagery projected on the conveyor at checkout, etc. Such object-relatedencounters can also be added to a stored repository of Tony's groceryprofile data—serving as context information useful, e.g., in tailoringthe search results (or order of search results) presented when Tonythereafter uses the Google search service or engages in otheractivities. If Tony does a Google search for a recipe (e.g., to make useof a surplus of tomatoes harvested from his garden), he might getdifferent search results than Alice, who enters the same searchterms—but whose grocery profile data is different.

These concepts needn't be applied only when Tony places an item on alist or in a cart. The same concepts can likewise be applied when Tonylooks at a product in a supermarket. Eye tracking systems—coupled with astore's layout data—allow a shopper's gaze to be accurately discerned,e.g., to identify that Tony is looking at a shelf location whereCampbell's Cream of Mushroom soups are stocked. The dwell time of thegaze can be noted as well. This information can be logged, published,and/or made available to others, as detailed above, and correspondingactions can be taken.

Some stores may choose to implement a Trusted Shopper checkoutoption—available to shoppers who meet certain qualification standards.These standards can include, e.g., purchases averaging more than$300/month, a loyalty-card shopping history with the store that datesback at least two years, an address within two miles of the store, etc.Other indicia of trustworthiness can be gathered from public and privatedatabases, e.g., including credit scores, employment history, backgroundchecks, etc. The Trusted Shopper option is designed to enable suchshoppers to more quickly check out, due to a heightened level of trust.For example, in a self-service checkout station, some of the alarms thatoccasionally bedevil regular shoppers (“Place item in the baggingarea!”) can be disabled for Trusted Shoppers. Similarly, instead ofrequiring goods to be machine-identified, the shopper can self-identifythe items (e.g., by tapping a displayed entry from a list of itemscommonly purchased by that shopper, or by submitting a shopping list toindicate items being purchased). Qualified shoppers can be authenticatedby facial recognition, card swipe and PIN number (e.g., loyalty card orcredit/debit card), etc.

Still Further Improvements

Electronic shelf labeling is increasingly common in retail stores. Suchlabeling employs LCD or other display units, attached to the fronts ofshelves, to present prices and product information for items offered forsale on the shelves. The displayed information is typically controlledby wireless transmission from a store computer. Such units may bepowered by a battery, by a photoelectric cell, or otherwise.

One vendor of such equipment is the Swedish company Pricer AB. Itstechnology is detailed, e.g., in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,005,962, 7,213,751,7,461,782, 20040012485 and 20060100967.

In accordance with a further aspect of the present technology, anenhanced type of shelf-mounted display unit is provided. Such a unit isadditionally equipped with a rear-facing sensor that senses identifyinginformation from an item presented for sale on the store shelf.

In a particular embodiment, the sensor comprises a 2D image sensor.Imagery captured by the sensor is processed (within the shelf-mountedunit, or at a remote computer processor) to decode machine readable datafrom a retail item stocked on the shelf. For example, a digitalwatermark payload on the item can be sensed and decoded.

The unit may also include an illumination source (e.g., a visible, IR,or UV LED) which is activated during a period of image capture (e.g., athirtieth of a second, every 5 minutes) to assure adequate illumination.

By reference to the sensed identifier, a remote computer identifies theitem, and sends the appropriate price and product information forpresentation on the display screen.

The sensor may sense data from several different adjoining products. Forexample, the sensor camera's field of view may encompass two or moredifferent types of Campbell's soups. A different digital watermarkpayload is decoded from each. In this case, the unit can be configuredto cyclically present price/product information for each productso-sensed. Alternatively, the image processing software may be arrangedto identify only a single product, e.g., by a block of watermark datathat is sensed closest to the center of the captured image frame.

(As in the other embodiments, barcode, RFID, and othersensing/identifying technologies can alternatively be employed.)

In a variant arrangement, price/product information is projected from adata projector, onto the product or onto the shelf. Such display can beinstead of, or in addition to, a display screen of the shelf-mountedunit.

Such arrangements permit store personnel to move inventory about theshelves as-needed, and the electronic shelf labeling adaptsautomatically—displaying the price of the proximate item.

A related embodiment employs shelf-mounted units with aisle-facingcameras. Each such unit captures imagery of shelving on the oppositeside of the aisle. From such imagery, the contents of those shelves canbe determined (e.g., by watermark decoding, product fingerprints, orotherwise). Such cameras may be used both to aid identification ofproducts presented for checkout (e.g., a can of soup disappeared from ashelf between images taken a minute apart; such a product will likely besoon presented for checkout). The camera imagery can also serve to aidwith automated inventorying. For example, each night the imagery can beanalyzed to identify depleted stock. If the Campbell's Tomato Soup shelfis looking bare—with only two identifiable cans on the shelf, then thestocking staff can make sure to provide more stock. (Such stocking canbe triaged. The most popular, or highest margin, products can berestocked before slower-moving, lower margin items are dealt with.)

A variant implementation does not use fixed cameras. Instead, one ormore movable cameras (which may be panoramic or hemispherical, ordodecahedral) are transported by a conveyance and capture imagery asthey move—akin to Google Street View. In a particular implementation,the camera is moved down the aisles—when the store is closed—by arobotic vehicle following a prescribed path on the floor, or even by astore clerk on a skateboard.

(Technology used in Google Street View is detailed, e.g., in U.S. Pat.No. 7,843,451 and 20110242271. Related technology is detailed in U.S.Pat. Nos. 5,703,604 and 6,141,034 to Immersive Media Corp.)

Data collected by any of the foregoing arrangements can be compiled andpresented in map form, and made available to store customers, e.g., viaan online service from outside the store. Such a service can receiveconsumer queries asking whether the store has a particular item instock. Such questions can be answered by reference to store inventoryinformation determined from the collected imagery. A customer can alsobe provided with a floor map and shelf photo detailing where, in thestore, a requested item is located.

A related aspect of the technology concerns projecting onto (or near)different retail packages, different indicia (e.g., red, yellow, orgreen colors) to indicate product expiration information. Again, theproducts can be sensed and identified by watermarks orbarcodes—preferably encoded with information by which expirationinformation can be determined. Some industry-standard productidentification codes, such as GS1 DataBar-Expanded barcodes and the GS1PTI standard, have payload fields expressly for the purpose of encodingexpiration date (or for expressing a product's lot code, which can beused to look up a corresponding expiration date in a database). Suchcodes can be conveyed as watermark payloads. Alternatively, expirationdate information can be encoded in a watermark, which is supplemental toother product-identifying technology (e.g., barcode or fingerprint).

A particular implementation comprises a fixed camera positioned to viewinto a dairy case of a grocery store, and an associated projector thatprojects a “heat map”-like pattern of colored areas onto the displayedproducts, indicating which items are relatively fresher, and which arerelatively older. A store can apply a differential pricing policy, e.g.,applying a 50% discount for products that are purchased on theirexpiration dates, a 30% discount for products that are purchased the dayprior, a 20% discount products that are purchased two or three daysbefore their expiration date, etc. The consumer can select from thedifferently-illuminated products in the dairy case, based on pricingconsiderations and date of expected use.

(The item's production date, packaging date, “best before” date, etc.,can alternatively be the basis for projection of different indicia.) Invariant arrangements, the colors simply indicate different productpricing (e.g., green indicates $1.89; blue indicates $1.49, etc.). Theseprices can reflect expiration-based discounts.

Instead of projecting colored indicia, the projector can projectalphanumeric information onto the respective products, e.g., indicatingexpiration date, price, or other information.

(The projection of indicia in registered alignment onto products is astraightforward application of known augmented reality techniques, inwhich graphical indicia are overlaid in registered alignment withfeatures of imagery captured by a camera from a real world scene andpresented on a display screen. In the present case, however, the indiciaare not overlaid on a screen displaying imagery of a real world scene,captured by a camera. Instead, the indicia are projected onto the realworld scene itself, from which the camera captures imagery. Althoughthere is typically not an identity mapping between pixels in theprojector LCD and corresponding pixels in the camera data, theappropriate mapping for any projector/camera pair can readily bedetermined.)

A related arrangement does not use a fixed camera in the store, butrather employs a camera-equipped device conveyed by the shopper (e.g., asmartphone or head mounted display device). Again, imagery is captureddepicting one or more product packages on a store shelf. The imagery isprocessed to decode machine readable indicia (e.g., digital watermarkdata) encoded on the packaging. The decoded information may literallyexpress expiration date information. Alternatively, it may comprise anindex code that is resolved—by reference to a table or other datastructure, either within the portable device or remote from it—to obtaincorresponding expiration date information.

In such arrangements, the portable device may project information ontothe product(s)—as in the fixed store camera case. More typically, theportable device presents the user with an augmented reality display, inwhich expiration indicia for different packages is displayed as agraphical overlay on the captured imagery. (Again, a colored heat mapcan be employed, whereby the shopper can quickly identify newest andoldest inventory among the imaged packages.)

Another aspect of the technology involves determining demographicinformation about a person near a particular shelf product display(e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, historical shopping history, etc.). Basedon this demographic information, the system presents an animated displaypromoting a product.

The person's demographic classification can be determined in variousways. One is by a shopper loyalty card that identifies the person, andprovides some associated demographic information. A related techniquesenses radio emissions from a portable device carried by the person(e.g., Bluetooth or cell signals). From such signals, the person'sidentity may be determined. Still another technique relies onimage-based facial analysis, through which age, gender, mood andethnicity may be estimated. A variety of “smart sign” systems operate inthis way. Such systems are available, e.g., from Intel (the IntelAudience Impression Metric Suite) and the French company Quividi (theVidiCube). Additional information is provided in PCT patent publicationWO 2007/120686.

The animation can be presented as an augmented reality overlay on thedisplay of the person's portable device. For example, imagine that in2020 a boy is walking down the cereal aisle of a grocery with hisfather, and both are wearing head-mounted display devices. The boy'sdisplay may present an animated sword fight between Captain Crunch andhis nemesis, appearing on the floor or on the shelf near the CaptainCrunch cereal. The dad, in contrast, may see an excerpt of a fitnessvideo appearing near the Shredded Wheat cereal. Competing with that,next to the adjoining Life cereal, the father may see an animationpromoting Life, and offering 20% off a box of Captain Crunch if the twoare purchased together. (The system that identified the boy'sdemographics also notes that his gaze is cast in the direction of theCaptain Crunch cereal, prompting such cross-promotion. Both cereals areproducts of the Quaker Oats Company.)

Audio may also accompany such animated presentations (and be delivered,e.g., to the shopper's Bluetooth ear bud).

Without some limit, there could be a countless number of “Buy me! Buyme!” messages, everywhere shoppers look. To quell the distraction, theuser's portable device preferably allows only a few such products/brandsto present promotional messages. In one such arrangement, the userdevice sends data indicating it will receive ten promotional messagesduring this visit to the store, and will grant those ten rights to theten companies that bid the most for the shopper's attention. Anautomated auction is conducted each time a shopper enters a store. Themore demographic information the shopper reveals to the potentialbidders, the more accurately the shopper can be targeted, and the higherthe bids are likely to be. The ten highest bidders provide the bid—forconsideration to the user (e.g., depositing funds in a user account),and presentations from those parties are then presented to the user inthe store.

(Such automated auctions are known from Google AdWords, and fromapplicant's published application 20110143811. Additional informationabout limiting the number of augmented reality overlays presented on ascene is detailed in applicant's published application 20110161076.)

Another aspect of the technology helps draw a shopper's attention tocertain products, e.g., which may be on their shopping list.

Such list information is provided by the shopper to the store computersystem. When the shopper is sensed in an aisle where an item on the listis stocked, the shopper's attention is drawn to the item location byillumination on or near such product. The illumination can be from ashelf-mounted device (e.g., an LED), or can be projected from a dataprojector (e.g., mounted on the ceiling, or an opposite shelf).

The location of the desired product on a shelf can be determined byreference to sensor data, as described elsewhere (e.g., fixed storecameras, such as on the ceiling, or on opposite shelves, or on the backof electronic label units; portable cameras—such as conveyed byshoppers, robots, or skateboarding clerks; RFID, etc.).

Relatedly, the shopper's attention can be drawn to items that are “onspecial.” The shopper's mobile device can present a store map thathighlights locations in the store where items are reduced inprice—identifying both where the items are, and where the shopper is. Asimilar display can be presented on a stationary display panel in thestore, or in an image presented from a stationary store projector.

Such a display/projector can also be operated to identify locations, inthe store, where items found on the shopper's shopping list can befound. (The shopping list may be transferred from the shopper to thestore computer in certain implementations.)

Still another aspect of the technology concerns assessing advertisingefficacy (e.g., newspaper advertising).

Advertising (outside of the store, not inside) is placed, promoting apremium that is available to purchasers of a required group of items.For example, a $5 discount may be awarded if a Heinz product (e.g.,ketchup), a box of cereal from the Quaker Oats Company (e.g., Life), anda Chicken of the Sea product (e.g., tuna), are all purchased together.

Inside the store (e.g., at checkout), the store computer analyzescollections of goods purchased by shoppers—looking for the specifiedcombination. If the required combination is sensed, the premium isawarded to the shopper.

Since the prize is not promoted inside the store, and the specifiedcollection of products would not regularly be purchased together(although they might—by chance), their presentation together at checkoutis some evidence that the advertising was effective in driving customerbehavior. The store may assess the relative effectiveness of differentadvertising media by publicizing different promotions in each, andnoting the respective effectiveness of each.

A further aspect of the present technology concerns use of heads up-likedisplays at checkout stations. As is familiar, a heads-up displayinvolves the projection of information onto a transparent surface, so aviewer sees both the projected information, and the scene beyond thesurface.

In the present situation, such a surface is placed between the shopperand a checkout conveyor. A data projector presents information on thesurface, for viewing by the shopper. This information can include, e.g.,price information, discount information, expiration information, calorieinformation, whether the item has been identified yet (e.g., a greenoverlay if identified, red if not), etc.

Desirably, such information is presented on the surface at a position sothat the shopper views the information in registered alignment with theitems to which it corresponds. This requires knowledge about theposition of the shopper's eyes/face, so that the projected image can bepresented where it appears to overlay (or be presented adjacent to) theactual item as seen through the surface. A fixed camera at the checkoutstation, pointed across the checkout conveyor to the area where theshopper stands, provides imagery that is analyzed to determine theposition of the shopper's eyes. (The position of the camera in areference frame is known, allowing pixel positions from its capturedimagery to be correlated with real-world position.) With thisinformation, the position at which certain information should beprojected on the transparent surface—to align with a certain item asviewed by the shopper—can be geometrically computed.

The fixed camera may only collect 2D information, and may not be able todiscern the shopper's position in a third dimension (i.e., towards oraway from the camera). But this is generally not critical to placementof the projected information. If more accuracy is desired, one of theknown depth-sensing camera arrangements can be employed.

A similar heads-up display arrangement can alternatively, oradditionally, be provided for the checkout clerk (if any). However,since the clerk may need to manipulate certain items as part of thecheckout, the presence of the transparent surface between the clerk andthe items may be an obstacle. Better, for the clerk, is to wear ahead-mounted display (HMD) that overlays the information on the imagepresented by the HMD, in augmented-reality fashion.

The HMD approach lacks the known camera position of the fixed cameraarrangement. However, the camera is close enough to the wearer's eyesthat parallax can be disregarded. This allows a one-to-one mappingbetween the camera and the display to be employed. For example, if anitem appears in the center of the camera field of view, the overlaidinformation for that item is similarly presented in the center of thedisplay.

(Widespread HMD use by clerks is expected to occur before widespread HMDuse by the general public. However, when shoppers do routinely have HMDapparatuses, their HMDs can be used in lieu of the transparent mediumapproach.)

In both the transparent medium and HMD cases, still further accuracy inoverlaying item information adjacent the corresponding item can begained by identifying locations of known reference points in the camerafield of view. SIFT/SURF/ORB-like approaches can be used for this, bymatching feature points in a field of view to corresponding featurepoints in a reference set of imagery. The feature points may comprisestatic features that are commonly in the camera's field of view, e.g.,corner points on the conveyor, other structural elements of the checkoutstation, credit card terminal, candy rack, adjoining checkout station,etc. Additionally or alternatively, reference markers (e.g., as detailedin patent publication 20110087497), placed at known positions, can beused. Such markers include calibrated features permitting their distanceand pose (and reciprocally, the distance and pose of the camera) to bedetermined.

In the just-described embodiments, camera data is also used to identifythe positions of items presented for checkout. This data can be capturedby one of the cameras noted above (e.g., a fixed camera looking towardsthe shopper, to determine eye positions, or a HMD camera).Alternatively, a different camera can be employed (again, having aposition that is known, or discernible by reference to known features).In the latter case, the field of view of the two cameras can begeometrically related by an appropriate transform.

Imagery from the above-noted cameras can also be used, by itself, or inconjunction with other sensor data, to identify the objects presentedfor checkout.

In accordance with another aspect of the technology, a checkout stationis equipped with a horizontal display panel (e.g., LCD, plasma, etc.).The panel is desirably positioned where items being purchased by ashopper are placed on it, or moved over it, during checkout.

The panel is controlled by an associated processor/display driver topresent item information relating to items above it. For example, if acan of soup is placed on the panel, the panel may present the price ofthe soup so that it is positioned next to the item (e.g., between thecan and the shopper, in a font that is sized for easy viewing).Similarly, if the soup can is passed over the display, the price can bepresented in animated fashion—following underneath the can as it moves.When the can passes off the panel, the price can be maintained at itsfinal position, until a price for another item needs to take thatposition.

Instead of, or in addition, to price, the display panel may presentother alphanumeric information, such as discount, expiration date, etc.It may also indicate whether the item has yet been recognized by thesystem. For example, if the item has not yet been identified, a redregion can be presented on the display where the alphanumeric iteminformation would otherwise be presented. Once the item has beenidentified, a green region can be presented (or the fact of itemidentification can simply be indicated by presentation of thealphanumeric information).

Such an arrangement is shown in FIG. 37. A point of sale system 371includes an item recognition portion coupled to a sensor 372 (e.g., oneor more cameras, etc.). A display panel 373 has an item 374 resting onit, which is recognized and determined by the POS station to have aprice of $2.49 (e.g., by reference to a database system). The sensedposition of the item, together with its determined price, is passed to adisplay panel driver 375, which causes this text to be presented on thedisplay panel, adjacent the item. (Shown on the right edge of the panelis a $1.39 price left by another item that was recently removed off thatedge, e.g., for bagging.)

In some embodiments, the display panel 373 can comprise a touch panelthat both displays information and receives human input associated withitem checkout. For example, the keypad presently found on the POSstation may instead, or also, be presented on the touchpad panel, foroperation by the clerk during the checkout process. A keypad maysimilarly be presented on the panel for operation by the shopper, e.g.,to enter a bankcard PIN number, a shopper loyalty number, or other dataentry. Such data-entry displays may be positioned in the corners 376 a,376 b of the touch panel.

Providing a horizontal display panel at a checkout station requires asubstantial reworking of existing checkout station hardware. Inaccordance with another aspect of the technology, a more modestarrangement is employed—one that is well suited to retrofitting ofexisting checkout stations.

In accordance with this aspect of the technology, a camera systemcaptures imagery from items at a checkout station, as in otherembodiments. However, instead of presenting visual feedback on ahorizontal display panel underneath the items, this arrangement employsan array of elongated visual indicators (e.g., LCD displays, or LEDs)along an edge of the checkout station—such as along a checkout conveyor.The visual indicators are operated by a processor (responsive to inputdata from the camera system) to identify items that have not beenidentified. For example, red LEDs can illuminate adjacent items that thesystem has not yet identified. In a conveyor embodiment, the redindication can “follow” the item down the conveyor, until the system hasidentified it—at which time it changes to green. If the item reaches thecheckout clerk and the adjoining LED is still red, the checkout clerkcan reposition the item on the conveyor to aid in identification, ortake other responsive action.

FIG. 38A is a partial plan view of such an arrangement. Three cans (383a, 383 b, 383 c) and a box (384) are traveling on a conveyor 381 towardsthe right. An array 382 of LEDs lines one side of the conveyor. LEDs 382a and 382 b are illuminated in red—indicating that the adjoining twoitems (cans 383 a and 383 b) have not yet been identified. As theconveyor moves the cans, the red indicia follows them (until they arerecognized, at which time such LEDs turn green).

An alternative such embodiment presents price data adjacent the items asthey travel down a conveyor, e.g., using an LCD display 385. FIG. 38Bshows such an arrangement (not to scale). Items that haven't yet beenrecognized have no adjoining price display.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the present technology, asensor system is employed at an exit area of a retail store (i.e., anarea between the checkout station(s) and the exit door) to identifyitems of merchandise by reference to data sensed by the system. Forexample, the system may detect—by an RFID sensor, that a box of Tidelaundry detergent is in the exit area, and may detect—by imagefingerprinting or digital watermark decoding—that a package ofdisposable diapers is also in the exit area. Such data is checkedagainst the store's database record of recent checkout transactions(e.g., in the past 2 or 5 minutes) to confirm that the identified itemwas the subject of a recent checkout transaction at a store checkoutstation.

Another aspect of the present technology concerns a collaborativecheckout method, in which the shopper and the clerk both simultaneouslypresent items for identification (e.g., to one or more scanners).

In a particular arrangement, items from the shopper's cart arepartitioned into two flows. One comprises “easy” items that are reliablymachine-identified without extra effort. These items include items inwatermarked packaging, since such items commonly have watermarks onmultiple different faces (e.g., canned and boxed items). This flow ishandled by the shopper. The other comprises more difficult items, e.g.,in which produce must be identified and weighed, or items that arelacking watermarking, etc. This flow is handled by the clerk. (The clerkmay also assist with the first item flow.)

The partitioning may simply comprise the clerk reaching into theshopper's basket for items known to be more difficult tomachine-identify—allowing the shopper to handle the other items.Alternatively, material handling technology can be employed, e.g., withcans and boxes being identified by shape and mechanically routed to theshopper, with all other items being routed for handling by the clerk.

As just suggested above, produce handling can be a bottleneck in grocerycheckout. The clerk must visually identify the item, and then look upthe current price—commonly in a guidebook or other unabridged listing.(Weighing is sometimes required as well.) Some produce may be easilyidentified, but other requires much more scrutiny. For example, a storemay stock multiple types of similar-looking apples (some organic, somenot).

To help relieve this bottleneck, one or more sensors are used to collectdata from the produce. Sometimes the clerk may open a bag to present theproduce to, e.g., an overhead camera. Sometimes the produce may becontained in a bag that is transparent at a particular sensingwavelength. In other arrangements, olfactory/chemical sensors are used.

From the sensor data, a class of the produce is recognized (e.g., byobject recognition based on imagery, or chemical signature). The systemmay recognize, for example, that the bag contains apples. Based on theclass, the system presents a listing of only the items in that class.For example, a POS display may present on a touch screen a display withjust 5 tiles—one labeled with each apple type presently stocked by thestore (MacIntosh, Red Delicious, Yellow Delicious, Fuji, and Braeburn),and associated price. The clerk touches the tile corresponding to thecorrect item, without having to browse a listing that includes bananas,oranges, etc. If the produce manager sells out of a particular type ofapple, the POS system is alerted to this fact, and the tile for thattype of apple is not thereafter presented to the clerk (until the itemis restocked).

Such arrangement can similarly be employed for self-checkout, by theshopper.

Industrial fruit inspection techniques can also be used. For example,multi-spectral imaging can be used, in which the fruit is illuminatedwith one or more known light sources, and reflection from the fruit issensed at multiple different wavelengths (e.g., 450, 500, 625, 750 and800 nm.). It will be recognized that some of these are outside the rangeof human vision (e.g., 750 and 800 nm.). LED light sources of differentwavelengths can be used, operated in sequential fashion, orsimultaneously. Some embodiments employ the infrared illuminationprovided by certain depth sensing cameras, to provide illumination.

Terahertz radiation and sensing can also be employed (e.g., in the 0.3—3THz frequency range).

Classification techniques can additionally or alternatively be employed,wherein the store system is trained to recognize fruits of differenttypes, by reference to training data (optical or otherwise) collectedfrom known samples.

In one such arrangement, when a batch of produce arrives at a store, itis processed to identify a distinguishing multi-spectral optical orchemical signature—before produce from the batch is made available tocustomers. Such signature data is entered into the store's computersystem—in association with data identifying the produce (e.g., by name,price, arrival date, supplier, etc.).

When, thereafter, any such produce is presented for checkout by ashopper, one or more sensors at the checkout station repeats the sensingoperation. The collected data is checked against the reference dataearlier collected—to identify a best match. If the produce isunambiguously identified, it is added to the checkout tally withoutfurther intervention (except, perhaps, weighing). If the sensedsignature appears to potentially correspond to several reference items,tiles for each possible are presented on the clerk's touch panel, forselection among the presented options.

Another aspect of the technology concerns bulk items that are packagedat the time of shopper selection. An example is cold cuts from a delicounter.

In accordance with this aspect of the technology, a clerk employs asheet of wrapping medium (e.g., butcher paper) that has been pre-printedto encode an identifier, by which that sheet can be distinguished fromother such sheets. In one particular arrangement, the sheets are sold inpackages of 250, and each is encoded with a different identifier (i.e.,serialized).

The clerk wraps the cold-cuts in such a sheet, places it on aweigh-scale, and enters a product code on the scale UI. The product codeidentifies the product (e.g., Lebanon Bologna), and allows the system torecall the price for that item (e.g., $4.39/pound). From the per-poundprice, and the weight, the scale computes the price of the item. Thisprice can be shown to the shopper from the scale display, and reportedto the shopper by the clerk.

The scale includes a camera that captures an image of the package, andextracts the wrapper medium identifier from such imagery. The scalesends the extracted medium identifier—together with the other productdetails (e.g., product code, product name, measured weight, price perpound, total price) to the store's central computer database forstorage.

When the shopper later presents the packaged item for checkout, a camerasystem at the checkout station senses the identifier from the wrappingmedium, and recalls from the store database the associated productparticulars (product code, weight, price, etc.). The price is added tothe checkout tally.

Sometimes—both with barcode scanning and other technologies—a singleitem may be twice-sensed when passing through a checkout station. Thiscan occur, for example, when a product box has barcodes on two or moresurfaces. Each barcode may be sensed, causing the system to concludethat multiple items are being purchased.

Checkout stations typically emit an audible alert each time an item isidentified (e.g., a beep). To alert the clerk—or shopper—that a possibleduplicate identification of a single item has occurred, the station canemit a distinctive tone when the same product identifier is sensedtwice, and included twice on the checkout tally. Such distinctive tonecan be of a frequency different than the usual beep, or it may consistof a chirp or other time-varying signal.

If a clerk (or shopper) finds that a product has been mis-counted, theerror can be corrected by gesturing with the product. For example, theclerk (shopper) can make a shaking gesture with the product. Thisshaking gesture is sensed by a camera system at the checkout station.The system understands this gesture to indicate that the product hasbeen added an extra time—erroneously—to the tally. It responds bycanceling one of the duplicate entries for that item.

More gamification elements may be introduced into the shoppingexperience to make it less tedious. One approach is tosteganographically mark one or a minority of items in a store with anidentifier, which permits the item to be identified as a prize-winningitem.

At checkout, imagery captured from items presented for purchase isanalyzed to see if any is one of the prize-winning items. If so, a prize(e.g., a discount, special merchandise, or other premium) is awarded tothe shopper.

Such arrangement can be practiced by applying stickers to severalgrocery items. Only one (or a few) of the stickers, however, encodes thesteganographic identifier indicating it is a prize-winning item. To theshoppers, all of the stickers are indistinguishable. Analysis of theimagery at checkout, however, reveals the winners.

(While such “treasure hunt” promotions have previously been employed insupermarkets, they have usually relied on human-visible indicia revealedonly when a product is opened for consumption. The winners can thenreturn the winning indicia to the store—or mail it back to theproducer—to redeem the prize. Such approach, however, led some consumersto open packaging in the store—looking for the winners—and leaving thenon-winners opened on the store shelves.)

In accordance with another aspect of the technology, a shopper's mobiledevice is employed to identify items being purchased while the shopperis still in the shopping aisle.

In such arrangement, a camera of the mobile device captures imagery fromeach item to be purchased—either while the item is still on the shelf,or after it has been placed in a basket. The imagery is analyzed toproduce identification data for such item.

If watermarking or fingerprinting is used, the product can typically berecognized regardless of its orientation (pose) relative to the camera.If, however, barcode reading is used, the shopper must commonlymanipulate the item so as to present the barcode to the camera. (Itemsare rarely stocked with barcodes facing the aisle.) This manipulationmay be a two-handed operation—one to hold the mobile device and one toturn the item. Fingerprint- and watermark-based item identification, incontrast, can commonly be done single-handedly—pointing the camera towhatever surface of the item is facing the camera, from the shelf orcart.

The shopper's mobile device can be executing a branded application—suchas a Wal-Mart app—that performs the item recognition task (optionally inconjunction with a partner processor in the cloud, e.g., matching imagefingerprint data, or looking-up barcode/watermark payloads). The shoppercan sign-in to the app with a loyalty shopper number, or otheridentifier.

In some arrangements, the device launches an app appropriate to thestore based on sensed context information. For example, the device maytrack its location (e.g., by GPS), and if it finds its location is in aWal-Mart store, it can launch the Wal-Mart app. In contrast, if it findsits location is in a Target store, it can launch the Target app.

Context other than location can be used. For example, audio sampled bythe mobile device microphone can be analyzed to extract identifyinginformation. A Target store, for example, may play adigitally-watermarked music track in its stores that allows mobiledevices to discern that they are in a Target store. (Shopkick works on asimilar principle, e.g., as detailed in its patent publication20110029370.)

When the shopper arrives at a checkout station, the tally of items inthe cart is transferred to the store computer (if same wasn't donepreviously, e.g., in real-time as the items were identified). The tallycan be transferred wirelessly (e.g., Bluetooth or Zigbee), by RFID,optically, or otherwise. Optical transmission can be by a series ofvisible indicia (e.g., barcodes or watermarks), each briefly displayedon a display of the mobile device (e.g., for a fifth, tenth or twentiethof a second), and sensed by a camera/scanner at the checkout station(essentially, a movie of barcodes/watermarks). If the mobile device is ahead-mounted display, the series of visible indicia may be projected(e.g., from the HMD) onto the counter or other surface, for capture bythe checkout station camera. A store clerk—if present—can facilitatepayment and bagging. Or these, too, can be handled by the shopper inself-serve fashion (e.g., with payment completed using the mobiledevice).

In accordance with a further aspect, the technology includes capturingimagery from an item, and processing the captured imagery to extractfirst data encoded in a first machine readable form. By reference tothis extracted first data, information is obtained about second dataencoded in a second machine readable form different than the first. Thecaptured imagery is then processed to extract that second data—using thejust-obtained information. In such arrangement, one or both of the firstor second machine readable forms can comprise asteganographically-encoded digital watermark.

Additional Details of One Particular Embodiment

This particular embodiment involves an item at a checkout station thatis moved along a path, such as by a conveyor or by a human. A firstcamera arrangement captures first 2D image data depicting the item whenthe item is at a first position along the path. (Suitable 2D imagingscanners are provided, e.g., by DataLogic ADC INC., located in Eugene,Oreg.)

The moving item includes a digital watermark pattern printed or carriedon the product packaging. In this particular embodiment, the digitalwatermarking spans a substantial portion of the packaging extent. Inregions where there is no printing (e.g., white space), a yellow orother unobtrusive watermark tint is applied. (Yellow watermarking isparticularly discussed, e.g., in Digimarc's published patent application20110274310 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,345,104.)

The following discussion concerns both enhancements to watermarkembedding and watermark detection for this particular applicationscenario.

Consider, first, general color embedding. In offset printing, a spotcolor is generated without a screens or dots. Colors are usuallygenerated by printing cyan, magenta, yellow, or black using a singlerun, but sometimes extra colors are added to print spot colors which arenot combinations of CMYK. Care must be taken when altering a cover imagethat contains spot colors. (An image that is to be encoded to convey adigital watermark pattern is commonly called a host, or cover, image.)Further, there might be constraints on the ink densities that areallowable at each pixel. Traditional watermark embedding, which usuallyalters pixel values in the RGB space, may not work well for packagingand other materials printed using spot colors. In particular, it canproduce objectionable artifacts in these uniformly-colored spot colorareas. The present embodiment employs a different method that embeds awatermark in an optimal ink color direction, to make these artifactsmuch less visible.

Some watermark embedders use the sRGB color space, which spans a limitedgamut that will not handle the extended dynamic range of packagingprinted with spot colors. By directly modifying the spot color inkdensities, the color accuracy and gamut of the cover image aremaintained. By changing two inks, we can construct a closed form for theoptimal color direction of a grayscale embedder by using a local linearapproximation. Extension to other definitions of watermark signal isalso discussed.

More particularly, this embodiment embeds a watermark signal in aprinted image by changing ink densities. By modifying combinations ofinks, we can construct a signal in different color directions. Theperceptibility of the change is measured with a visibility functionwhich is just length in a modified version of the Lab color coordinatesystem. Obviously there is a tradeoff between visibility and watermarkdetection robustness, but below certain level of distortion, we wouldlike to maximize the watermark signal that we insert that meets thisvisibility constraint.

An example watermark embedder takes a color image and converts it togray scale image as a starting point for message modulation. Wegeneralize this by allowing a more general function of color space. Forexample, we might create a U detector (from YUV color space) which has awatermark signal embedded in S_(U)(R,B,G)=(−0.15 R)+(−0.29 G)+(0.44 B).We call this signal definition the watermark signal (S_(wm)), for short.

Once the watermark signal is defined, we can construct the embedderwhich finds the optimal ink changes to maximize watermark signal for agiven visibility constraint. This optimal ink mix depends on thedefinition of both the watermark signal and the visibility function. Wedescribe an enumerated (e.g., brute force) optimization that will workfor any color combinations.

Changing the available inks in a small region R allows one to change theoriginal base color to a color in a subset of the full gamut availableon the printer. If N inks are available for watermark signal insertion,then the set of all ink combinations, which we denote by Σ_(ink), is abounded N dimensional set. Given a point in Σ_(ink), we can combine theinks to get a color. The space of all available colors for R, which wedenote by Γ_(ink), is a subset of the full printer gamut. The watermarksignal is a real valued mapping on the color gamut Γ_(ink). For examplewe could define a watermark signal function by S_(Grey)(R,G,B)=((R+G+B)/3) which maps a pixel color to a grayscale. Thedefinition of S_(Grey) is given in sRGB coordinates but should be smoothacross the entire printer gamut.

From the original color location, the visibility increases as we changethe ink density. We choose from Σ_(ink) the ink combinations that haveacceptable visibility. The set of colors generated by these inkcombinations is the compact set Γ_(ink), and the watermark signalfunction S_(wm) has a maximum and minimum on Γ_(ink).

If only two inks are available at a point, then changing these two inkswill typically result in a two dimensional surface of the availablecolors, and both Σ_(ink) and Γ_(ink) are two dimensional. In this casewe can think of Γ_(ink) as a two dimensional surface in threedimensional color space. In FIG. 39A we show an example plot of howvisibility changes when two inks are combined. It is important toemphasize that this graph is the possible range of values for oneparticular pixel on the image. The colors of the plane in the plot arethe actual colors generated by the various combinations of inkdensities. The flat gray plane is a plane of constant visibility and hasgray values that indicate the change, ΔS_(wm), in the watermark signal.The watermark signal in this case is defined by S_(wm)(R, B,G)=(R+G+B)/3. The white lines in the gray plane indicate extra inkconstraints for these two inks, and the tall vertical black line in thecenter of the plot indicates the starting base color. The pool of valuesbelow the gray visibility plane are ink density pairs that are withinthe acceptable visibility constraint. The two points (P+, P−) in thispool with the largest signal are the optimal points for watermarkembedding (corresponding to positive and negative ΔS_(wm)) and areindicated by black squares.

The optimum points (P+, P−) have changes mainly in ink 2. As we raisethe visibility constraint, the gray plane of acceptable visibility willrise and the gray pool of acceptable ink values (at the center) willgrow larger. But at each visibility, the goal is to find the points inthe acceptable visibility pool that have the largest positive andnegative watermark signal.

In FIG. 39B we show the same color point with the same visibility andink constraints, but we change the watermark signal to the functionS_(wm)(R,B,G)=(−0.15 R)+(−0.29 G)+(0.44 B). One can insert a largerwatermark signal, and the ink constraints are the limiting factor. Inthis case, it is clear that the optimal positive watermark signalcorresponds to increasing ink 2 but decreasing ink 1.

We define a mapping L: Σ_(ink)→Γ_(ink). We write the color set Γ_(ink),in Lab or some other perceptually uniform color coordinates.

In the case of two inks we can derive a precise formula. We constructthe Jacobian of the mapping L. In this case, our pools of acceptablevisibility are ellipses. There is a closed form for the optimalgrayscale value on this ellipse. If c_(r) is the color of cover image,then we take the Jacobian derivative of L at c_(r). Let u₁, u₂ inΣ_(ink), be changes along ink 1 and ink 2 respectively. We definequantities,

E(c _(r))=J _(L)(c _(r))u ₁ ·J _(L)(c _(r))u ₁ ,F(c _(r))=J _(L)(c_(r))u ₁ ·J _(L)(c _(r))u ₂ ,G(c _(r))=J _(L)(c _(r))u ₂ ·J _(L)(c_(r))u ₂.

The ink change vectors α u₁+β u₂ that meet a visibility constraint R_(v)can be written in terms of E, F and G,

R _(v) ²=α² E(c _(r))+2αβF(c _(r))+β² G(c _(r))

This is an ellipse. If we assume a grayscale watermark signal then usingLagrangian multipliers we can find the optimal embed points in terms ofλ which is linear in the visibility R_(v),

$\begin{bmatrix}\alpha \\\beta\end{bmatrix} = {{{\lambda \begin{bmatrix}{{G\left( {w \cdot v_{1}} \right)} - {F\left( {w \cdot v_{2}} \right)}} \\{{- {F\left( {w \cdot v_{1}} \right)}} + {E\left( {w \cdot v_{2}} \right)}}\end{bmatrix}}\mspace{14mu} {where}\mspace{14mu} w} = {\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left( {1,1,1} \right)^{t}}}$

Now back to some checkout scenarios. Recall from above that an item tobe purchased moves along a path, such as a conveyor. A first cameraarrangement captures image data depicting the item when the item is at afirst position along the path.

This next section discusses a prioritization of watermark titles incaptured image data (e.g., 30 frames or more per second) fed to awatermark detector. Sometimes, a digital watermark detector is fed avideo feed of much larger resolution (e.g., 1024×1280 pixels) than whatis covered by a watermark tile detector (e.g., 256×256 pixels). If adetector is looking at single-blocks (tiles), then the detector may runmultiple times for every frame to analyze each tile. Given the resourceconstraints of the hardware (e.g., embedded device, ARM processor,etc.), it may be difficult to process the whole area of every frame in atimely manner (e.g., as packaged items are buzzing by on the conveyorpast the camera). Therefore, it is beneficial to limit the number ofsingle-block analyses running on every frame, and to present those imageblocks most likely to have decodable watermark data before lesspromising blocks.

This may not be an issue for well-marked large packages, because theyfill large portions of the camera field of view, and thus the chancethat a single block detector is placed on a watermarked area is high. Onthe other hand, small packages, like cans and small boxes (e.g., a teabox), may only occupy a small portion of the whole field of view, asshown in FIGS. 40A-40F, making the chance of a single block detectingbeing placed on a well watermarked area very low.

During a normal checkout pace, when the camera is running at its normalspeed of 30 FPS, a typical small package will show up in 2 to 4 frameswith good presence, as shown in FIGS. 40A-F. Since a small packagecovers a small area of the camera's field of view, the strategy ofreading the watermark from many blocks may have diminishing returns interms of complexity vs. robustness. Most possibly, the detector willspend time looking for a watermark in background areas of the image, orin blocks spanning the package boundary, but not on the package itself.

It will be recognized that the entering frame (FIG. 40A) and the leavingframe (FIG. 40F) are not considered good for watermark detection, e.g.,since the item occupies such a small fraction of the image frame.

For this camera system, where the input is a video stream, we have foundthat background subtraction from moving averages of previous frames is acomputationally efficient and effective method to extract the fastmoving foreground objects. This method separates static or slow movingobjects (classified as background) from fast moving objects (classifiedas foreground), and focuses the computational resource on the moremeaningful foreground objects.

The foreground detection works as follows:

Background(k+1)=alpha*Frame(k+1)+(1−alpha)*Background(k),  1.

Foreground(k+1)=Frame(k+1)−Background(k+1), ifFrame(k+1)−Background(k+1)>threshold,  2.

where indices k or k+1 represents the incoming frame's temporal axis,alpha is the learning rate which controls how to update background fromthe incoming frame, and the threshold is to suppress any noise fromillumination variations.

This process is computationally efficient because it simply usespixel-wise subtraction, addition and comparison. Also, its memory usageis low, since it does not require saving all previous frames, but onlyan average of most recent frames. By efficient post-processing andclustering the results of each pixel (or groups of pixels), approximateinformation about location/shape of the foreground object can beobtained. All processing is done in real time.

The location/shape of the object can be utilized to constrain the areawhere the detector needs to be placed. Significant savings in thecomplexity can be achieved without losing detection robustness.

Once the foreground region has been detected, we can assign detectionblocks to locations in the imagery to enhance detection. For example, astatic pattern, nick-named B17, is shown in FIGS. 41A and 41B. FIG. 41Ashows the location of 6 blocks, and FIG. 41B shows the location of 9more. Two additional, larger blocks (corresponding to watermark tilesthat are twice as large in each direction as tiles for the other blocks)bring the total number of blocks to 17.

One option is to use the detected foreground region to mask the blocksof the B17 pattern. That is, for each of the 17 blocks, such block isprocessed for watermark detection only if it falls inside the foregroundregion.

Another, second option is a bit more complex.

First, the detected foreground region is expanded to a square window,encompassing all the foreground pixels. Then the square foregroundregion is divided into equally spaced zones (e.g., one, four, nine,etc.—whichever yields zones most similar in size to the 15 smallerblocks of the B17 pattern). The foreground pixels (i.e., incoming pixelvalues from the camera, minus averages of corresponding pixels inprevious frames) inside each zone are summed together. This summation isa representation of the illumination of the foreground in each zone.

Second, two other approaches are used to prioritize the placement ofsingle block detectors (i.e., areas in which the watermark detector willlook for watermark signal) inside the square foreground region, becausethe number of single block analysis areas may not be enough to cover thewhole region. The first approach is based on illumination (orbrightness). If the zones are ranked according to their illumination,those of high rank may indicate good illumination and those of low rankmay indicate poor illumination. We would prefer not to place the singleblock detectors on poorly illuminated zones. Also we may decide todiscard zones with extreme high illumination values because theyindicate over-saturated pixels from glare (caused, e.g., by specularreflection from the packaging by the scanner illumination). An orderedranking of the remaining zones is established, and pixels for thesezones are sent in that order to the watermark decoder for processing.

The second approach is based on the geometric position of each zone. Insome cases, the areas at the top and bottom of the image frame detectpoorly, due to over-saturated pixels on the top (i.e., those nearest theillumination source) and poorly-illuminated pixels on the bottom (i.e.,those most remote from the illumination source). So we assign a weightto each zone based on its geometric location within the frame. Forexample, center blocks may be weighted more significantly than edgeblocks. Or edge blocks may only be consulted if no signal is found incenter blocks. Again, a ranking of the different zones, based on thesecriteria, is established, and pixels for these zones are sent in thatorder to the watermark decoder for processing.

To merge the two approaches, we can combine a ranking based on thenormalized illumination value of each zone with a ranking based ongeometric position, yielding a hybrid ranking Those zones that appearmost likely to contain a decodable watermark signal are sent to thedecoder in an order established by such hybrid ranking.

Another option is illustrated in FIGS. 42A-42J. These illustrations arebased on a sequence of images captured while a coffee can was passed infront of a camera.

Each of FIGS. 42A-42J is a composed frame based on one of the images inthe sequence. Each Figure is composed of (a) the incoming frame, shownin the upper left quadrant, (b) the detected square foreground region,shown in the lower left quadrant, and (c) the single block detectorsoverlaid on top of the incoming frame, shown in the upper rightquadrant. (The lower right quadrant is nil.) The minimum offset betweenthe selected blocks is set to a predetermined pixel value, e.g., 64pixels, to avoid choosing blocks with a large overlap (i.e. blocks thatare from similar image areas).

Preliminary experiments have been conducted to verify the process. Thetest datasets used are ad-hoc captures from non-professional checkers.There are two datasets, one named YangScan and the other namedBeckyScan. The YangScan dataset contains mostly small packages (cans)and comprises 1025 frames of about 30 seconds recording from a digitalcamera, while the BeckyScan dataset contains both small and largepackages and comprises 596 frames. The BeckyScan dataset contains moreframes depicting packages, so it has more frames in which watermarkswere detected.

The results of using the first option, which uses the foreground regionto trim down the B17 pattern, are shown in Table I. There are 168 framesand 53 frames detected as containing watermark from BeckyScan andYangScan datasets, respectively, using the fixed static B17 pattern. Byswitching to the flexible foreground trimmed B17, to get the samedetection rate, on average, only 10 frames are required for BeckyScan,and only 7 frames are required for YangScan. Since YangScan containsmore small packages, and the benefits of using foreground detection aremore obvious on small packages, the saving in terms of number of blocksper frame is more significant for YangScan.

TABLE I 168 frames detected with 168 frames detected with flex patternfixed pattern BeckyScan 2680/275 = 9.75 blocks/frame 17 blocks/frame 53frames detected with 53 frames detected with flex pattern fixed patternYangScan 978/162 = 6.04 blocks/frame 17 blocks/frame

The results of using the second option are shown in FIGS. 43A and 43B,which compare flexible pattern from foreground (Option 2) with fixedstatic pattern, in placing single block detectors.

The straight lines in FIGS. 43A and 43B mark the number of detectedframes from BeckyScan and YangScan datasets using the static B17pattern, 168 and 53, respectively. The curves indicate the number ofdetected frames when choosing different numbers of blocks placed insidethe foreground region. In general, if there are enough detector blocks,say, e.g., 17, then the flexible block pattern gives better detectionresults. And if the number of detector blocks is reduced, say, e.g.,down to 9, the flexible block pattern still provides a good detectionrate with much reduced computational cost.

In other cases we implement a “smart watermark detector”—one that cantrain itself based on user or cashier habits or preferences. Forexample, through a series of training check-out runs, it is determinedthat cashier 1 holds packaged items at a certain angle, or atpredetermined distances from the camera, or at a certain swipe speed, orplaces items on a conveyor at certain orientations. Other traininginformation may include, e.g., proximity to the scanner, speed ofscanning, production rotation habits, professional vs. amateur checker,etc. Or the detector may determine that it is only getting watermarkreads from certain block areas when a certain checker checks out. Allthis information (or subsets of this information) can be used to adjustthe watermark detector, e.g., by determining which blocks to prioritizein a detection process. For example, it might be found that cashier 1commonly swipes items in front of the camera so that the packages are inthe top or bottom of the field of view. Whereas, above, these blockareas would typically be given low prioritization. But if the detectorknows that the cashier is cashier 1, then these areas can be more highlyprioritized.

A user's self-checkout habits—including how and at what speed theypresent objects to the check-out camera—can be monitored and stored forlater use in configuring a watermark detector, e.g., by prioritizingcertain block selections for watermark detection. A user's store loyaltycard ID can be associated with a database or other record that storessuch information, enabling the proper detector prioritization. Suchinformation can then be used to inform the watermark detector on how tobetter process imagery when that person is checking out.

Some checkout stations will continue to monitor barcodes even ifsupplemental symbologies like watermarking are present during checkout.In these case, consider the flowing flow:

-   -   1. Imagery is presented to a watermark detector.    -   2. The watermark detector analyzes the imagery and detects a        watermark. The watermark may include a payload or index or other        information.    -   3. A process is invoked that utilizes that watermark information        to create an image overlay for captured imagery. The image        overlay preferably includes a barcode or other symbology that        includes the watermark information, or information obtained from        utilizing the watermark information. That way, if the same        imagery that was analyzed for a digital watermark is then fed to        a barcode reader the graphic overlay barcode will be easily        recognizable even if the depicted product packaging did not        display a barcode.

One challenge may occur if two or more of the same packaged items arewithin a single image frame. For example, 2 cans of Diet Mountain Dewmight be pictured in the same frame. The watermark detector finds aread, but in different, non-contiguous image areas. In such cases awatermark payload may be used to look up a spatial template. The spatialtemplate is sized roughly to represent a particular item (e.g., dietsoda). The spatial template is placed around a block area wherewatermarks were detected. If watermarks (or watermark components likeorientation components) are located outside of the spatial template thenthere is a likelihood that the image frame includes two or morewatermarked objects.

The cashier can be warned to examine this area more carefully, or thesystem may make a determination independently to ring up two items.

In another implementation, the checkout camera includes or cooperateswith special illumination. The illumination projects watermarkorientation information (e.g., a grid, which may be steganographic) onthe packaging. The projected illumination is captured along with thepackaged items. The projected grid is deciphered by the watermarkdetector to help determine orientation information include relativedepth, orientation, etc. This information can be used in watermarkdetection, or foreground/background decisions.

In still another implementation, watermark information is used toidentify certain areas on packaging. For example, a watermark signal(e.g., an orientation component) might be used to outline the nutritionfacts on a package. The watermarked area is then used to create aspatial position on a reading device (in this case, e.g., a smartphonelike an iPhone or Android device). An augmented reality display isoverlaid on the watermarked area.

Logos and Close-Ups

As noted earlier, one advantage to fingerprint-based objectidentification techniques is that they allow object identification fromthe front panel of packaging—without manipulation to find a barcode.This can facilitate checkout, since clerks needn't search to find abarcode—they can just scan the front of the object. This alsofacilitates object identification by shoppers using their smartphones instore aisles—they can simply point their phone cameras at objectssitting on store shelves, and quickly obtain product information, suchas ingredients, nutritional information, etc.

However, applicant has found that fingerprint-based identification ofobjects using just front-panel artwork is unreliable. In particular,fingerprint-based arrangements exhibit a false-positive behavior that isunacceptably high, e.g., indicating that an object has been identified,but providing wrong identification information.

In point-of-sale applications, where the object identification controlsthe price charged to the customer, mis-identification is unacceptable,e.g., because it results in erroneous charges to customers, andincorrect sales data for store inventory and stocking purposes.Moreover, object mis-identification to shoppers seeking productinformation in store aisles is also a serious problem, e.g., as it mayidentify a product as peanut- or gluten-free, when the shopper islooking for products that are free of ingredients to which they areallergic.

In accordance with a further aspect of the present technology, the falsepositive problem of fingerprint-based object identification isalleviated by collecting information on product logos. Such logos areidentically presented on a variety of different products, introducing anelement of confusion in fingerprint-based recognition systems. Bytreating logo artwork different than other front panel artwork, lessconfusion results, and better performance is achieved.

FIG. 44 shows four of the cereals marketed by Kellogg Co. Each frontpanel includes distinctive artwork. But all share an element incommon—the Kellogg's logo. Automated recognition systems sometimesbecome confused by this commonality—increasing the risk that one productwill be mis-identified as another.

As is familiar to artisans, fingerprint-based recognition systemsgenerally identify a set of scale invariant robust features (alsosometimes termed “interest points” or “keypoints”) from capturedimagery, and try to match data about these features with feature dataearlier identified from reference imagery. (Corners and line-ends arecommonly used as robust features.) If sufficient correspondence is foundbetween features of the captured imagery, and features of one of thereference images, the two are found to match, and the captured imagerycan then be identified by information associated with the referenceimagery.

FIG. 45 conceptually shows some of the reference data used in aparticular embodiment of such a fingerprint-based identification system.Artwork from a reference sample of product packaging is processed toderive SIFT keypoint descriptors. Each descriptor comprises a 128 partfeature vector that characterizes aspects of the imagery around thekeypoint, and requires a total of 512 bytes to express. A front panel ofa cereal box or the like may have on the order of 1000 such keypoints,each with a corresponding descriptor.

(FIG. 46A shows artwork from a front panel of Kellogg's Raisin Brancereal, and FIG. 46B shows a representation of the keypoint descriptorsfor this artwork. Due in part to the complex features in the depictedcereal bowl, a SIFT algorithm generated 5651 keypoints.)

At the top left of FIG. 45, under the Keypoint Descriptor heading, is afirst keypoint. While this datum is actually 512 bytes in length, it isabbreviated in FIG. 45 by its first and last bytes, i.e., “26DE4 . . .1BD1A.” That row of the table also indicates the product package towhich the keypoint descriptor corresponds, i.e., a box of Kellogg'sRaisin Bran cereal, having a UPC identifier of 038000391095.

Following this initial entry in the FIG. 45 table are several more rows,showing several more of the keypoint descriptors from the Kellogg'sRaisin Bran artwork—each associated with the cereal name and its UPCcode. Ellipses interrupt the table at various places—each indicatinghundreds of omitted rows.

After the thousand or so of keypoint descriptors associated with theKellogg's Raisin Bran cereal artwork are fully detailed, the table nextstarts listing keypoints associated with a Kellogg's Rice CrispiesCereal box. Again, there may be a thousand or so such keypointdescriptors—associated with the name and UPC code for the Kellogg's RiceCrispies cereal.

Although just two cereals are identified in FIG. 45, the data structurecan stretch for millions of rows, detailing keypoint descriptors forthousands of different products found in a supermarket.

In use, a point of sale terminal (or a shopper's smartphone camera)captures an image of a retail product. Software then identifies about athousand robust features in the image, and computes descriptors for eachof these keypoints. A matching process then ensues.

Matching can be done in various ways. For expository convenience, anexhaustive search is described, although more efficient techniques maybe used.

The first keypoint descriptor from the input image is compared againsteach of the million or so reference keypoint descriptors in the FIG. 45data structure. For each comparison, a Euclidean distance is computed,gauging the similarity between the subject keypoint, and a keypoint inthe reference data. One of the million reference descriptors willthereby be found to be closest to the input descriptor. If the Euclideandistance is below a threshold value (“A”), then the input keypointdescriptor is regarded as matching a reference keypoint. A vote isthereby cast for the product associated with that reference keypoint,e.g., Kellogg's Rice Crispies cereal.

(The value of threshold “A” can be determined empirically, based ontesting with known matching and non-matching artwork.)

This descriptor matching process is repeated for the second keypointdescriptor determined for the input image. It is compared against everydescriptor in the reference data and, if a close enough correspondenceis found (i.e., a Euclidean distance less than threshold “A”), thenanother vote for a product is cast.

This process continues through all thousand or so of the keypointdescriptors derived from the input image. As a result, hundreds of voteswill be cast. (Many hundred more descriptors may not be close enough,i.e., within threshold “A,” of a reference descriptor to merit a vote.)The final tally may show 208 votes for Kellogg's Rice Crispies cereal,33 votes for Kellogg's Raisin Bran cereal, 21 votes for Kellogg'sNutri-Grain Snack bars, and lesser votes for many other products.

A second threshold test is then applied. In particular, the cast votesare examined to determine if a reference product received votesexceeding a second threshold (e.g., 20%) of the total possible votes(e.g., 200, if the input image yielded 1000 keypoint descriptors). Inthe example just-given, this second threshold of 200 was exceeded by the208 votes cast for Kellogg's Rice Crispies cereal. If this secondthreshold is exceeded by votes for one product, and only one product,then the input image is regarded to have matched that product. In theexample case, the input image is thus identified as depicting a packageof Kellogg's Crispies cereal, with a UPC code of 038000291210.

As noted earlier, however, some of these matches between input imagedescriptors, and reference descriptors, may be due to the Kellogg'slogo, rather than other aspects of the packaging. In fact, the presenceof the Kellogg's logo in both the input image and the referenceKellogg's Raisin Bran imagery may have tipped the vote count across the“B” threshold of 200. (See, in FIG. 46B, the multiplicity of keypointsin the region of the Kellogg's logo.)

In accordance with one aspect of the technology, robust featuresassociated with product logos—and the associated keypointdescriptors—are flagged in the data structure. Such an arrangement isshown in FIG. 47, which is similar to FIG. 45, with the addition of acompany name, and the right-most column: “Auxiliary Info.” This columnincludes information (e.g., a flag bit, or text) indicating that thekeypoint corresponds to a logo graphic.

There are many ways logos can be identified. One is by examiningreference images for similarity (i.e., examining their keypointdescriptors for similarity). Such an arrangement is shown conceptuallyin FIG. 48. Logos are usually found in the top half of front panelartwork—often in the top third or top quarter. They are generally foundin the center, but other placements are not uncommon. By suchheuristics, an algorithm can be made to search for common graphicalfeatures across multiple reference images.

In FIG. 48, the top quarter of various reference images are shown. FIG.49 shows graphical elements that are found to be in common. Oncegraphical elements that are common between a threshold number (e.g., 2,4, 10, 30, etc.) of reference images are found, they can be deduced tobe logos. A robust feature identification procedure is then applied tothe “logo,” and keypoint descriptors are calculated. The reference datais then searched for reference keypoint descriptors that match, withinthe Euclidean distance threshold “A,” these logo descriptors. Those thatmatch are flagged, in the data structure, with information such as isshown in the right-most column FIG. 47.

It will be noted that this analysis produces graphical features that maynot conventionally be regarded as product logos, e.g., the curved archand the box to the right side (which states “Kellogg's Family Rewards”)in FIG. 49. As used herein, however, such common elements are regardedas logos, and keypoints corresponding to such graphical elements areflagged accordingly in the reference data structure of FIG. 47. (Suchset of common artwork elements may be termed “extended logos,” and mayinclude text artwork, e.g., “Net Wt. 8 oz,” if it recurs across multipleproducts.)

It will be recognized that descriptors in the reference database needn'tbe checked against all others in the database to identify similarities.Other information can shortcut the task. For example, if company nameinformation is available for products—as in FIG. 47, then descriptorsneed only be checked within products from the same company. (A logo on aKellogg's cereal typically won't be found on a Pepsi drink.)

A different way to identify logos makes use of artwork submitted to theUS Patent and Trademark Office, in connection with federal registrationof trademark rights. Such logos are classified by the goods with whichthey are associated. Packaged items found in grocery stores are commonlyin trademark Classes 5 (pharmaceuticals), 21 (kitchen utensils andcontainers), 29 (foodstuffs of animal origin), 30 (foodstuffs of plantorigin), 32 (non-alcoholic beverages), and 33 (alcoholic beverages).Artwork for such logos (“registered logos”) can be downloaded in bulkfrom the US Patent and Trademark Office, or other services, andprocessed to derive keypoint descriptors. These descriptors can bestored in a separate data structure, or in the FIG. 47 data structure.In the latter case the UPC, Company and Product Name fields may berepurposed, e.g., to indicate the federal registration number, theregistrant name, and the goods for which the trademark is used. Or thedescriptors can be compared against other keypoint descriptors in thedata structure, so that matching descriptors (e.g., those matchingwithin threshold “A”) can be flagged as in FIG. 47. By such technique,just descriptors for the branded logo shown in FIG. 50, rather than forthe deduced logo of FIG. 49, can be flagged in the database.

Again, if the reference data identifies the companies that produced theproducts, or if the product names include the trademarked names, thenthe task is simplified. The federal trademark database can be searchedfor only those trademarks that are owned by listed companies, or thatinclude those trademarked brand name. Registered logos from such searchcan be processed to identify keypoints and derive descriptors, and thereference data can be searched to tag those descriptors that appear tocorrespond to descriptors of the registered logos.

Once keypoint descriptors (recognition features) associated with logosare identified, the system can take different responsive actions,depending on whether keypoints in input imagery match with logokeypoints or other keypoints.

For example, some consumers who capture imagery of products on a shelf(e.g., to obtain more information) may assume—mistakenly—that it ishelpful to zoom-in on a product logo. When such a captured image isanalyzed for keypoint descriptor matches, the software may find that alarge number of the keypoints (e.g., more than 20%, 50% or 70% of thekeypoints) are associated with a logo. This is evidence that the logo istoo dominant a fraction of the imagery (i.e., it spans more than 15%,30% or 60% of the image area—the particular value in this range beingset by application constraints). The software may respond by controllingthe user interface to present a text- or voiced-instruction to the usersuggesting that they back-up and capture a view of more of theproduct—to provide a view of more package artwork surrounding the logo.

Alternatively, if the software finds such a large fraction of logokeypoints in the shopper-captured imagery, it may decide that theshopper actually is interested in the brand represented by thelogo—rather than one particular product. Thus, another response is forthe software to disregard keypoints in the captured imagery that do notmatch keypoints in the FIG. 47 data structure flagged as logo points,and instead seek to identify all products in that database that havethat same logo on their artwork. The requirement that one—and onlyone—product be identified can be ignored. Instead, all referenceproducts whose logo-flagged keypoints match keypoints in theshopper-submitted artwork may be identified. (Again, not all keypointsneed match. A threshold test can be applied, e.g., that 25% of thelogo-flagged keypoints in a reference image must correspond—withinEuclidean distance “A”—to a keypoint descriptor in the shopper-submittedimagery, in order for that reference image to be among the matchesidentified to the shopper, e.g., on the user interface.)

Another way the logo-flagged descriptors in the reference database canbe used is by ignoring them. For example, in the exhaustive searchexample, the process can skip comparing keypoints in the input imageagainst logo-flagged keypoints in the reference database. (In someextreme examples, logo-flagged keypoints in the reference database mayeven be deleted.) Thus, any match between an input image keypoint, and akeypoint known to correspond to a logo, is given no consideration indetermining an object match.

A less draconian approach is not to ignore logo-flagged referencedescriptors altogether, but rather to accord such descriptors lessweight in a matching process. For example, if an input descriptormatches a logo-flagged descriptor associated with Kellogg's Raisin Brancereal, then such match doesn't count as a full-vote towards a Kellogg'sRaisin Bran match. Instead, it may count only as one-fifth of a vote.The reference data may include a weighting value among the dataassociated with each keypoint descriptor.

Such arrangement is shown in FIG. 51. Those descriptors flagged in FIG.47 as “LOGO POINT” are here annotated with a numeric value of 0.2, whichcan be used as the aforementioned weighting value. (In contrast, otherdescriptors are assigned a weighting value of 1.0, i.e., a full vote.)

To review, it will be understood that the just-discussed technologyincludes identifying a retail product, based at least in part onassessing correspondence between image recognition features associatedwith the retail product and image recognition features associated with acollection of reference products. Such a method includes receivingplural recognition features derived from imagery associated with theretail product; distinguishing a subset of the received features thatare associated with a logo, the logo being present on plural of saidreference products; and taking an action in response to saiddistinguishing.

The technology also includes enrolling a retail product in a referenceproduct database, by acts such as: receiving plural recognition featuresderived from imagery associated with the retail product; distinguishinga subset of the received features that are associated with a logo, thelogo being present on plural of the reference products; and treating thedetermined subset of features differently in enrolling the receivedrecognition features in the reference product database.

Likewise, the technology extends to receiving plural recognitionfeatures derived from imagery associated with a retail product;identifying recognition features in a reference data structure thatcorrespond to certain of the received features; and scoring a matchbetween the retail product and a reference product based on thecorrespondence, said scoring being performed by a hardware processorconfigured to perform such act. In such method, the scoring includesweighting, based on auxiliary data stored in the data structure,correspondence between one recognition feature in the reference datastructure and one recognition feature among the received recognitionfeatures.

Similarly, the technology includes obtaining trademark registrationinformation comprising logo artwork; deriving recognition features fromthe logo artwork; storing the derived recognition features in a datastructure, together with information flagging the stored features ascorresponding to a logo; also storing recognition features derived fromretail product packaging in a data structure; and using the storedrecognition features in recognizing a retail product.

By these and various other techniques, descriptors associated with logosare treated differently than other descriptors in identifying matchingproducts.

While the above description has focused on shoppers usingcamera-equipped portable devices in grocery aisles, it will berecognized that the same techniques are applicable elsewhere, e.g., atpoint of sale checkouts, etc.

Similarly, while the detailed arrangements described annotating thereference database to indicate which descriptors correspond to logos, itwill be recognized that the descriptors produced from theshopper-captured imagery can be similarly-tagged. For example, suchdescriptors can be checked for correspondence against descriptorsassociated with logos, and when a match is found (e.g., a Euclideandistance less than threshold “A”), that input image descriptor can betagged as being a logo point.

Of course, instead of tagging descriptors as corresponding to logos,other descriptors may instead be tagged as corresponding to non-logoartwork.

While the discussion has focused on SIFT descriptors, the artisan willrecognize that such techniques can be applied to any type offingerprinting. Moreover, other arrangements—such as bag of features(aka “bag of words”) approaches can be used with such technology, withlogo-associated features/words treated differently than others. (Bag offeatures methods are further detailed, e.g., in Nowak, et al, Samplingstrategies for bag-of-features image classification, ComputerVision—ECCV 2006, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 490-503; and Fei-Feiet al, A Bayesian Hierarchical Model for Learning Natural SceneCategories, IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,2005; and references cited in such papers.)

Similarly, while SIFT approaches are generally location un-constrained,the technologies described herein can also be used withlocation-constrained fingerprinting approaches. (See, e.g., Schmid, etal, Local grayvalue invariants for image retrieval, IEEE Trans. onPattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 19.5, pp. 530-535, 1997;Sivic, et al, Video Google: A text retrieval approach to object matchingin videos, Proc. Ninth IEEE Int'l Conf. on Computer Vision, 2003; andPhilbin, et al, Object retrieval with large vocabularies and fastspatial matching, IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,2007.)

The reference images, from which reference keypoint descriptor datashown in FIGS. 47 and 51 are derived, can be those produced bycommercial services such as Gladson and ItemMaster, as detailedelsewhere in this specification (including documents incorporated byreference).

Although the foregoing discussion has emphasized processing of imageryfrom the fronts of consumer packaged goods, it will be recognized thatthe same principles are applicable to imagery of any view, or source.

(Even with the logo-based improvements noted above, certainimplementations may nonetheless show a false-positive rate higher thanis acceptable for point-of-sale checkout. Such false positives may bedue, e.g., to a vendor selling chicken broth in both boxes and cans,with the same front artwork on each; or ketchup sold indifferently-sized bottles, but with identical front labels except forthe net weight. As discussed earlier, the fix for this problem is togather more evidence that can be weighed in making an identificationconclusion. Steganographic watermark data—if available, puts theidentification question to rest, due to its highly deterministiccharacter. Less certain, but nonetheless useful, is shape recognition.With stereo cameras, Kinect, or other depth-sensing technology, theexposed profile of an object can be sensed and used to determine sizeand configuration data about the product. This will often go a long waytowards resolving ambiguities in fingerprint-based identification.)

Reference was made to a consumer who may capture product imagery fromtoo-close a perspective—interfering with accurate fingerprint-basedproduct identification. The above-noted technique identified thissituation by finding an unusually high percentage of keypointsassociated with logo artwork in the captured imagery. Another way thissituation may be identified is by examining the captured imagery todetermine if it appears to span the full package width (or height).

Most packages (boxes, cans, etc.) have parallel outer edges. Althoughperspective distortion can warp strict parallelism, full-width productimages typically include two generally straight long edges at outerboundaries of the package. Detection of such paired edges can serve as acheck that adequate imagery is being captured.

This is illustrated by FIGS. 52 and 53. In FIG. 52, a shopper has used asmartphone to capture an image from a cracker box on a storeshelf—zooming in on the product logo. However, such an image may notcapture enough image detail to perform reliable fingerprint-basedidentification.

Software can analyze the captured imagery to see if it has paired edgesindicative of an image spanning across the package. FIG. 52 lacks suchedges. The software responds by instructing the user to zoom-out tocapture more of the desired packaging.

After the shopper follows such instructions, the image shown in FIG. 53may be captured. This image includes two extended edges 110 and 112. Thesoftware can perform various checks. One is that each edge spans atleast half of the image (image height in this example). Another is thatthe two edges are found in opposite halves of the image (left- andright-halves in this example). Another is that the average angularorientations of the two edges differ by less than a threshold amount(e.g., 15 degrees, 8 degrees, 4 degrees, etc.) If all of these tests aremet, then the image seems suitable for fingerprint detection, and suchaction proceeds.

Edge detection is familiar to artisans. Wikipedia has an article on thetopic. A few suitable algorithms include Canny, Canny-Deriche,Differential, Sobel, Prewitt, Roberts cross, etc.

Some embodiments may not require a pair of straight edges. Instead, apair of shaped edges may suffice, provided that they are mirror-images.(The generic case, encompassing both straight edges and mirrored shapededges may be termed a pair of complementary edges.)

Feature Recognition

As noted, certain implementations of the detailed technology employrecognition of robust feature descriptors (e.g., SIFT, SURF, and ORB) toaid in object identification.

Generally speaking, such techniques rely on locations within imagerywhere there is a significant local variation with respect to one or morechosen image features—making such locations distinctive and susceptibleto detection. Such features can be based on simple parameters such asluminance, color, texture, etc., or on more complex metrics (e.g.,difference of Gaussians). Each such point can be represented by dataindicating its location within the image, the orientation of the point,and/or a feature vector representing information associated with thatlocation. (A feature vector commonly used in SURF implementationscomprises 64 data, detailing four values of luminance gradientinformation for each of 16 different square pixel blocks arrayed aroundthe interest point.)

Such image features may comprise individual pixels (or sub-pixellocations within an image), but these technologies typically focus on 2Dstructures, such as corners, or consider gradients within square areasof pixels.

SIFT is an acronym for Scale-Invariant Feature Transform, a computervision technology pioneered by David Lowe and described in various ofhis papers including “Distinctive Image Features from Scale-InvariantKeypoints,” International Journal of Computer Vision, 60, 2 (2004), pp.91-110; and “Object Recognition from Local Scale-Invariant Features,”International Conference on Computer Vision, Corfu, Greece (September1999), pp. 1150-1157, as well as in U.S. Pat. No. 6,711,293.

SIFT works by identification and description—and subsequent detection—oflocal image features. The SIFT features are local and based on theappearance of the object at particular interest points, and are robustto image scale, rotation and affine transformation. They are also robustto changes in illumination, noise, and some changes in viewpoint. Inaddition to these properties, they are distinctive, relatively easy toextract, allow for correct object identification with low probability ofmismatch, and are straightforward to match against a (large) database oflocal features. Object description by a set of SIFT features is alsorobust to partial occlusion; as few as three SIFT features from anobject are enough to compute its location and pose.

The technique starts by identifying local image features (“keypoints”)in a reference image. This is done by convolving the image with Gaussianblur filters at different scales (resolutions), and determiningdifferences between successive Gaussian-blurred images. Keypoints arethose image features having maxima or minima of the difference ofGaussians occurring at multiple scales. (Each pixel in adifference-of-Gaussian frame is compared to its eight neighbors at thesame scale, and corresponding pixels in each of the neighboring scales(e.g., nine other scales). If the pixel value is a maximum or minimumfrom all these pixels, it is selected as a candidate keypoint.

(It will be recognized that the just-described procedure is ablob-detection method that detects space-scale extrema of ascale-localized Laplacian transform of the image. The difference ofGaussians approach is an approximation of such Laplacian operation,expressed in a pyramid setting.)

The above procedure typically identifies many keypoints that areunsuitable, e.g., due to having low contrast (thus being susceptible tonoise), or due to having poorly determined locations along an edge (theDifference of Gaussians function has a strong response along edges,yielding many candidate keypoints, but many of these are not robust tonoise). These unreliable keypoints are screened out by performing adetailed fit on the candidate keypoints to nearby data for accuratelocation, scale, and ratio of principal curvatures. This rejectskeypoints that have low contrast, or are poorly located along an edge.

More particularly this process starts by—for each candidatekeypoint—interpolating nearby data to more accurately determine keypointlocation. This is often done by a Taylor expansion with the keypoint asthe origin, to determine a refined estimate of maxima/minima location.

The value of the second-order Taylor expansion can also be used toidentify low contrast keypoints. If the contrast is less than athreshold (e.g., 0.03), the keypoint is discarded.

To eliminate keypoints having strong edge responses but that are poorlylocalized, a variant of a corner detection procedure is applied.Briefly, this involves computing the principal curvature across theedge, and comparing to the principal curvature along the edge. This isdone by solving for eigenvalues of a second order Hessian matrix.

Once unsuitable keypoints are discarded, those that remain are assessedfor orientation, by a local image gradient function. Magnitude anddirection of the gradient is calculated for every pixel in a neighboringregion around a keypoint in the Gaussian blurred image (at thatkeypoint's scale). An orientation histogram with 36 bins is thencompiled—with each bin encompassing ten degrees of orientation. Eachpixel in the neighborhood contributes to the histogram, with thecontribution weighted by its gradient's magnitude and by a Gaussian withσ 1.5 times the scale of the keypoint. The peaks in this histogramdefine the keypoint's dominant orientation. This orientation data allowsSIFT to achieve rotation robustness, since the keypoint descriptor canbe represented relative to this orientation.

From the foregoing, plural keypoints of different scales areidentified—each with corresponding orientations. This data is invariantto image translation, scale and rotation. 128 element descriptors arethen generated for each keypoint, allowing robustness to illuminationand 3D viewpoint.

This operation is similar to the orientation assessment procedurejust-reviewed. The keypoint descriptor is computed as a set oforientation histograms on (4×4) pixel neighborhoods. The orientationhistograms are relative to the keypoint orientation and the orientationdata comes from the Gaussian image closest in scale to the keypoint'sscale. As before, the contribution of each pixel is weighted by thegradient magnitude, and by a Gaussian with σ 1.5 times the scale of thekeypoint. Histograms contain 8 bins each, and each descriptor contains a4×4 array of 16 histograms around the keypoint. This leads to a SIFTfeature vector with (4×4×8=128 elements). This vector is normalized toenhance invariance to changes in illumination.

The foregoing procedure is applied to training images to compile areference database. An unknown image is then processed as above togenerate keypoint data, and the closest-matching image in the databaseis identified by a Euclidian distance-like measure. (A “best-bin-first”algorithm is typically used instead of a pure Euclidean distancecalculation, to achieve several orders of magnitude speed improvement.)To avoid false positives, a “no match” output is produced if thedistance score for the best match is close—e.g., 25% to the distancescore for the next-best match.

To further improve performance, an image may be matched by clustering.This identifies features that belong to the same referenceimage—allowing unclustered results to be discarded as spurious. A Houghtransform can be used—identifying clusters of features that vote for thesame object pose.

An article detailing a particular hardware embodiment for performing theSIFT procedure is Bonato et al, “Parallel Hardware Architecture forScale and Rotation Invariant Feature Detection,” IEEE Trans on Circuitsand Systems for Video Tech, Vol. 18, No. 12, 2008. Another is Se et al,“Vision Based Modeling and Localization for Planetary ExplorationRovers,” Proc. of Int. Astronautical Congress (IAC), October, 2004.

Published patent application WO07/130688 concerns a cell phone-basedimplementation of SIFT, in which the local descriptor features areextracted by the cell phone processor, and transmitted to a remotedatabase for matching against a reference library.

While SIFT is perhaps the most well-known technique for generatingrobust local descriptors, there are others, which may be more or lesssuitable—depending on the application. These include GLOH (c.f.,Mikolajczyk et al, “Performance Evaluation of Local Descriptors,” IEEETrans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., Vol. 27, No. 10, pp. 1615-1630,2005); and SURF (c.f., Bay et al, “SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features,”Eur. Conf. on Computer Vision (1), pp. 404-417, 2006; as well as Chen etal, “Efficient Extraction of Robust Image Features on Mobile Devices,”Proc. of the 6th IEEE and ACM Int. Symp. On Mixed and Augmented Reality,2007; and Takacs et al, “Outdoors Augmented Reality on Mobile PhoneUsing Loxel-Based Visual Feature Organization,” ACM Int. Conf. onMultimedia Information Retrieval, October 2008. A feature vectorcommonly used in SURF implementations comprises 64 data, detailing fourvalues of luminance gradient information for each of 16 different squarepixel blocks arrayed around the interest point.)

ORB feature-based identification is detailed, e.g., in Calonder et al,BRIEF: Computing a Local Binary Descriptor Very Fast, IEEE Transactionson Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 34, No. 7, pp.1281-1298; Calonder, et al, BRIEF: Binary Robust Independent ElementaryFeatures, ECCV 2010; and Rublee et al, ORB: an efficient alternative toSIFT or SURF, ICCV 2011. ORB, like the other noted feature detectiontechniques, is implemented in the popular OpenCV software library (e.g.,version 2.3.1).

Other Remarks

Having described and illustrated the principles of applicant's inventivework with reference to illustrative features and examples, it will berecognized that the technology is not so limited.

For example, sensing and other processes described as taking place atone location (e.g., a checkout station) may additionally, oralternatively, be conducted elsewhere (e.g., in a shopper's cart, in astore aisle, etc.).

Naturally, data from the sensors can be relayed to a processor by avariety of means—including both wired (e.g., Ethernet) and wireless(e.g., WiFi, Bluetooth, Zigbee, etc.).

Technologies described with reference to fixed systems (e.g., a POSterminal) can instead be implemented through use of portable devices(e.g., smartphones and headworn devices). Technologies described withreference to smartphones can likewise be practiced with headworn devices(e.g., the Google Glass device).

For expository convenience, parts of this specification posit that aretail store (e.g., a supermarket) has two essential portions: thecheckout portion, and a shopping portion. The former comprises thecheckout station (which can include any or all of a POS terminal,conveyor, cash drawer, bagging station, etc.), and the adjoining areaswhere the shopper and clerk (if any) stand during checkout. The lattercomprises the rest of the store, e.g., the shelves where inventory isstocked, the aisles that shoppers traverse in selecting objects forpurchase, etc.

As noted, while many of the detailed arrangements are described withreference to conveyor-based implementations, embodiments of the presenttechnology can also be used to inspect, identify and inventory itemspresented by hand, or carried on the bottom of a shopping cart, etc.Indeed, item inventory and payment needn't be performed at aconventional checkout counter. Instead, items may be identified in thecart (or while being placed in the cart), and payment can be effected atany location—using the consumer's smartphone.

Although the specification discusses various technologies in connectionwith decoding watermark data from product packaging in retail settings,it will be recognized that such techniques are useful for the otheridentification technologies and other applications as well.

Off-the-shelf photogrammetry software can be used to perform many of theoperations detailed herein. These include PhotoModeler by Eos Systems,Inc., and ImageModeler by AutoDesk.

Similarly, certain implementations of the present technology make use ofexisting libraries of image processing functions (software). Theseinclude CMVision (from Carnegie Mellon University), ImageJ (a freelydistributable package of Java routines developed by the NationalInstitutes of Health; see, e.g., en<dot>Wikipedia<dot>org/wiki/ImageJ;the <dot>convention is used so that this text is not rendered inhyperlink form by browsers, etc.), and OpenCV (a package developed byIntel; see, e.g., en<dot>Wikipedia<dot>org/wiki/OpenCV, and the bookBradski, Learning OpenCV, O'Reilly, 2008). Well-regarded commercialvision library packages include Vision Pro, by Cognex, and the MatroxImaging Library. Edge detection, ellipse-finding, and image segmentationare a few of the many operations that such software packages perform.

Some embodiments advantageously employ compressed sensing techniques. Asis familiar to artisans, compressed sensing allows representation andprocessing of imagery with greatly-reduced data sets. See, e.g., Candeset al, An Introduction to Compressive Sampling, IEEE Signal ProcessingMagazine, March, 2008, 10 pp. Similarly, known computational photographytechniques are widely useful in processing imagery for objectidentification.

Data captured by cameras and other sensors (and information derived fromsuch sensor data), may be referred to the cloud for analysis, orprocessing may be distributed between local and cloud resources. In somearrangements, cloud processing is performed in lieu of local processing(or after certain local processing has been done). Sometimes, however,such data is passed to the cloud and processed both there and in thelocal device simultaneously. The cloud resource may be configured toundertake a more detailed analysis of the information than is practicalwith the time and resource constraints of a checkout system. Moreparticularly, the cloud resource can be configured to learn from thesensor data, e.g., discerning correlations between certain barcodes,watermarks, histograms, image features, product weights, producttemperatures, etc. This knowledge is occasionally downloaded to theother devices, and used to optimize their operations. (Additionally, acloud service provider such as Google or Amazon may glean other benefitsfrom access to the sensor data, e.g., gaining insights into consumershopping behavior, etc. (subject to appropriate privacy safeguards). Forthis privilege, they may be willing to pay the retailer—providing a newsource of income.)

Although the specification does not dwell on the point, the artisan willunderstand that aspects of the detailed technology can form part of apoint-of-sale (POS) station, which typically includes a keyboard, adisplay, a cash drawer, a credit/debit card station, etc. The station,in turn, is networked with a main store computer system, which commonlyincludes a database system accessible by the POS stations. In turn, themain store computer system is typically networked across the internet,or otherwise, with a corporate data processing system. (A block diagramshowing some of the system components is provided in FIG. 7.)

Known supermarket checkout systems, such as those by Datalogic, NCR,Fujitsu, etc., can be adapted to incorporate some or all of thetechnology detailed herein.

Reference was made to image segmentation. Techniques in addition tothose detailed above are familiar to the artisan, includingthresholding, clustering methods, histogram-based methods,region-growing methods, edge detection, etc.

Technology for encoding/decoding watermarks is detailed, e.g., inDigimarc's U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,912,295, 6,721,440, 6,614,914, 6,590,996,6,122,403, and 20100150434, as well as in pending application Ser. No.13/664,165, filed Oct. 30, 2012, and 61/749,767, filed Jan. 7, 2013.

Laser scanners used in supermarket checkouts are specialized, expensivedevices. In contrast, certain embodiments of the present technology usemass-produced, low-cost cameras—of the sort popular in HD video chatapplications. (The Logitech HD Webcam C615 captures 1080p video, andretails for less than $100.)

Such cameras commonly include sensors that respond down into theinfrared spectrum, but such response is typically blocked byIR-reflective films. Such sensors can be used without the IR-blockingfilm to sense IR as well as visible light. As detailed in various of thecited watermarking patents (e.g., U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,912,295 and6,721,440), use of IR sensing allows watermark and barcode informationto be encoded in regions that—to a human—appear uniformly colored.

Although reference was made to GPUs, this term is meant to include anydevice that includes plural hardware cores operable simultaneously.Intel, for example, uses the term “Many Integrated Core,” or Intel MIC,to indicate such class of device. Most contemporary GPUs haveinstruction sets that are optimized for graphics processing. The AppleiPhone 4 device uses a PowerVR SGX 535 GPU (included in asystem-on-a-chip configuration, with other devices).

While detailed in the context of a supermarket implementation, it willbe recognized that the present technologies can be used in otherapplications, including postal and courier package sorting,manufacturing lines, etc.

In some embodiments, a wireless PDA-like device is used in conjunctionwith one or more fixed cameras to gather imagery from a checkoutstation. Typically, the wireless device is operated by a store clerk,but alternatively a smartphone owned and operated by a shopper can beused in this role. Some newer smartphones (e.g., the HTC PD29100)include multiple cameras, which can be used advantageously in thedetailed arrangements.

In addition to the cited HTC model, particularly contemplatedsmartphones include the Apple iPhone 5, and smartphones followingGoogle's Android (e.g., the Galaxy S III phone, manufactured by Samsung,the Motorola Droid Razr HD Maxx phone, and the Nokia N900), and Windows8 mobile phones (e.g., the Nokia Lumia 920).

(Details of the iPhone, including its touch interface, are provided inApple's published patent application 20080174570.)

The design of smartphone and other computer systems used in implementingthe present technology is familiar to the artisan. In general terms,each includes one or more processors, one or more memories (e.g. RAM),storage (e.g., a disk or flash memory), a user interface (which mayinclude, e.g., a keypad or keyboard, a TFT LCD or OLED display screen,touch or other gesture sensors, a camera or other optical sensor, acompass sensor, a 3D magnetometer, a 3-axis accelerometer, a 3-axisgyroscope, one or more microphones, etc., together with softwareinstructions for providing a graphical user interface), interconnectionsbetween these elements (e.g., buses), and one or more interfaces forcommunicating with other devices (which may be wireless, such as GSM,3G, 4G, CDMA, WiFi, WiMax, or Bluetooth, and/or wired, such as throughan Ethernet local area network, a T-1 internet connection, etc.).

The processes and system components detailed in this specification maybe implemented as instructions for computing devices, including generalpurpose processor instructions for a variety of programmable processors,including microprocessors (e.g., the Intel Atom, the ARM A5, theQualcomm Snapdragon, and A4 the nVidia Tegra 4; the latter includes aCPU, a GPU, and nVidia's Chimera computational photographyarchitecture), graphics processing units (GPUs, such as the nVidia TegraAPX 2600, and the Adreno 330—part of the Qualcomm Snapdragon processor),and digital signal processors (e.g., the Texas Instruments TMS320 andOMAP series devices), etc. These instructions may be implemented assoftware, firmware, etc. These instructions can also be implemented invarious forms of processor circuitry, including programmable logicdevices, field programmable gate arrays (e.g., the Xilinx Virtex seriesdevices), field programmable object arrays, and application specificcircuits—including digital, analog and mixed analog/digital circuitry.Execution of the instructions can be distributed among processors and/ormade parallel across processors within a device or across a network ofdevices. Processing of data may also be distributed among differentprocessor and memory devices. As noted, “cloud” computing resources canbe used as well. References to “processors,” “modules” or “components”should be understood to refer to functionality, rather than requiring aparticular form of software and/or hardware implementation.

Software instructions for implementing the detailed functionality can beauthored by artisans without undue experimentation from the descriptionsprovided herein, e.g., written in C, C++, Visual Basic, Java, Python,Tcl, Perl, Scheme, Ruby, etc., in conjunction with associated data.Smartphones and other devices according to certain implementations ofthe present technology can include software modules for performing thedifferent functions and acts.

Software and hardware configuration data/instructions are commonlystored as instructions in one or more data structures conveyed bytangible media, such as magnetic or optical discs, memory cards, ROM,etc., which may be accessed across a network. Some aspects of thetechnology may be implemented as embedded systems—a type of specialpurpose computer system in which the operating system software and theapplication software is indistinguishable to the user (e.g., as iscommonly the case in basic cell phones). The functionality detailed inthis specification can be implemented in operating system software,application software and/or as embedded system software, etc.

As indicated, different of the functionality can be implemented ondifferent devices. For example, certain of the image processingoperations can be performed by a computer system at a checkout counter,and other of the image processing operations can be performed bycomputers in “the cloud.”

(In like fashion, data can be stored anywhere: in a local device, in anetworked, remote device, in the cloud, distributed between suchdevices, etc.)

As indicated, the present technology can be used in connection withwearable computing systems, including headworn devices. Such devicestypically include display technology by which computer information canbe viewed by the user—either overlaid on the scene in front of the user(sometimes termed augmented reality), or blocking that scene (sometimestermed virtual reality), or simply in the user's peripheral vision.Exemplary technology is detailed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,397,607,20100045869, 20090322671, 20090244097 and 20050195128. Commercialofferings, in addition to the Google Glass product, include the VuzixSmart Glasses M100, Wrap 1200AR, and Star 1200XL systems. An upcomingalternative is augmented reality contact lenses. Such technology isdetailed, e.g., in patent document 20090189830 and in Parviz, AugmentedReality in a Contact Lens, IEEE Spectrum, September, 2009. Some or allsuch devices may communicate, e.g., wirelessly, with other computingdevices (carried by the user or otherwise), or they can includeself-contained processing capability. Likewise, they may incorporateother features known from existing smart phones and patent documents,including electronic compass, accelerometers, gyroscopes, camera(s),projector(s), GPS, etc.

Use of such identification technologies to obtain object-relatedmetadata is familiar to artisans and is detailed, e.g., in theassignee's patent publication 20070156726, as well as in publications20120008821 (Videosurf), 20110289532 (Vobile), 20110264700 (Microsoft),20110125735 (Google), 20100211794 and 20090285492 (both Yahoo!).

Linking from watermarks (or other identifiers) to corresponding onlinepayoffs is detailed, e.g., in Digimarc's U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,947,571 and7,206,820.

Applicant's other work that is relevant to the present technologyincludes that detailed in pending patent applications 61/838,165, filedJun. 2, 2013, 61/818,839, filed May 2, 2013, Ser. No. 13/840,451, filedMar. 15, 2013 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,060,113), Ser. No. 13/425,339, filedMar. 20, 2012, Ser. No. 13/651,182, filed Oct. 12, 2012 (now U.S. Pat.No. 8,868,039), Ser. No. 13/684,093, filed Nov. 21, 2012 (now U.S. Pat.No. 8,620,021), Ser. No. 13/863,897, filed Apr. 16, 2013, Ser. No.13/873,117, filed Apr. 29, 2013, 61/745,501, filed Dec. 21, 2012, and61/838,165, filed Jun. 21, 2013, and published applications 20100228632,20110212717, 20110214044, 20110161076, 20120284012, 20120218444,20120046071, 20120300974, 20120224743 and 20120214515.

This specification has discussed several different embodiments. Itshould be understood that the methods, elements and concepts detailed inconnection with one embodiment can be combined with the methods,elements and concepts detailed in connection with other embodiments.While some such arrangements have been particularly described, many havenot—due to the large number of permutations and combinations. Applicantssimilarly recognize and intend that the methods, elements and conceptsof this specification can be combined, substituted and interchanged—notjust among and between themselves, but also with those known from thecited prior art. Moreover, it will be recognized that the detailedtechnology can be included with other technologies—current andupcoming—to advantageous effect. Implementation of such combinations isstraightforward to the artisan from the teachings provided in thisdisclosure.

While this disclosure has detailed particular ordering of acts andparticular combinations of elements, it will be recognized that othercontemplated methods may re-order acts (possibly omitting some andadding others), and other contemplated combinations may omit someelements and add others, etc.

Although disclosed as complete systems, sub-combinations of the detailedarrangements are also separately contemplated (e.g., omitting various ofthe features of a complete system).

From the present disclosure—including the noted sources, an artisan canimplement embodiments of the present technology without undueexperimentation.

While certain aspects of the technology have been described by referenceto illustrative methods, it will be recognized that apparatus configuredto perform the acts of such methods are also contemplated as part ofapplicant's inventive work. Likewise, other aspects have been describedby reference to illustrative apparatus, and the methodology performed bysuch apparatus is likewise within the scope of the present technology.Still further, tangible computer readable media containing instructionsfor configuring a processor or other programmable system to perform suchmethods is also expressly contemplated.

Plenoptic cameras are available, e.g., from Lytro, Inc., Pelican ImagingCorp., and Raytrix, GmbH. Some of their work is detailed in patentpublications 20110122308, 20110080487, 20110069189, 20070252074,20080266655, 20100026852, 20100265385, 20080131019 and WO/2010/121637.The major consumer camera manufacturers are also understood to haveprototyped such products, as has Adobe Systems, Inc. Some of Adobe'swork in this field is detailed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,620,309, 7,949,252,7,962,033.

Artisans sometimes draw certain distinctions between plenoptic sensors,light field sensors, radiance cameras, and multi-aperture sensors. Thepresent specification uses these terms interchangeably; each should beconstrued so as to encompass the others.

Technology for supermarket checkout stations, incorporating imagers, isshown in U.S. patent documents 20040199427, 20040223663, 20090206161,20090090583, 20100001075, U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,654,872, 7,398,927 and7,954,719. Additional technologies for supermarket checkout, and objectidentification, are detailed in the following patent publications ownedby Datalogic, a leader in the field: 20070084918, 20060147087,20060249581, 20070267584, 20070284447, 20090152348, 20100059589,20100213259, 20100217678, 20100158310, 20100123005, 20100163628, and20100013934.

A survey of semiconductor chemical sensors is provided in Chang, et al,Electronic Noses Sniff Success, IEEE Spectrum, Vol. 45, No. 3, 2008, pp.50-56. Illustrative implementations are detailed in Chang et al,Printable Polythiophene Gas Sensor Array for Low-cost Electronic Noses,Journal of Applied Physics 100, 014506 (2006) and in U.S. Pat. Nos.5,140,393, 7,550,310, and 8,030,100. Semiconductor chemical sensors areavailable from a variety of vendors, including Owlstone Nanotech, Inc.

Head-mounted display systems, and related technology, are detailed,e.g., in published U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,235,529, 8,223,088, 8,203,605,8,183,997, 8,217,856, 8,190,749 and 8,184,070 (Google); 20080088936,20080088529, 20080088937 and 20100079356 (Apple); and 20120229909,20120113092, 20050027515 and 20120068913 (Microsoft).

Electronic displays in which optical detectors see-through the displaypanel to sense optical data are known, e.g., from patent publication20120169669, and from Hirsch, et al, BiDi Screen: A Thin, Depth-SensingLCD for 3D Interaction using Light Fields, ACM Transactions on Graphics,Vol. 28, No. 5, December 2009, and from Izadi et al, ThinSight:Integrated Optical Multi-touch Sensing through Thin Form-factorDisplays, Proc. of the 2007 ACM Workshop on Emerging DisplaysTechnologies, Paper No. 6.

The present disclosure details a variety of technologies. For purposesof clarity, they are often described separately. However, it will berecognized that they can be used together. While each such combinationis not literally detailed, it is applicant's intent that they beso-combined.

Similarly, while this disclosure has detailed particular ordering ofacts and particular combinations of elements, it will be recognized thatother contemplated methods may re-order acts (possibly omitting some andadding others).

Although disclosed as complete systems, sub-combinations of the detailedarrangements are also separately contemplated.

The artisan will be familiar with other writings useful in variousimplementations of the present technology, e.g., concerning constructionof 3D models using imagery captured from different viewpoints. Examplesinclude the PhD thesis of Snavely, “Scene Reconstruction andVisualization from Internet Photo Collections,” University ofWashington, 2008, and his published patent application 20070110338.These writings teach, e.g., “structure through motion” methods, and howcorresponding image features in different images can be identified andhow the geometries of the two images can thereby be spatially related.

The Wikipedia article “Structure from Motion” provides additionalinformation on such technology, and includes links to several suchsoftware packages. These include the Structure from Motion toolbox byVincent Rabaud, Matlab Functions for Multiple View Geometry by AndrewZissermann, the Structure and Motion Toolkit by Phil Torr, and theVoodoo Camera Tracker (a tool for integrating real and virtual scenes,developed at the University of Hannover).

Such methods are also known from work in simultaneous location andmapping, or SLAM. A treatise on SLAM is provided in Durrant-Whyte, etal, Simultaneous Localisation and Mapping (SLAM): Part I The EssentialAlgorithms, and Part II State of the Art, IEEE Robotics and Automation,Vol. 13, No. 2 (pp. 99-110) and No. 3 (pp. 108-117), 2006. Oneimplementation of SLAM adapted to operate even on mobile deviceCPUs/GPSs is available from 13^(th) Lab, AB.

OpenSource implementations of SLAM are widely available; many arecollected at OpenSLAM<dot>org. Others include the CAS Robot NavigationToolbox (at www<dot>cas<dot>kth<dot>se/toolbox/index<dot>html), Matlabsimulators for EKF-SLAM, UKF-SLAM, and FastSLAM 1.0 and 2.0 atwww<dot>acfr<dot>usyd<dot>edu<dot>au/homepages/academic/tbailey/software/index<dot>html;Scene, at www<dot>doc<dot>ic<dot>ac<dot>uk/˜ajd/Scene/index<dot>html;and a C language grid-based version of FastSLAM atwww<dot>informatik<dot>uni-freiburg<dot>de/˜haehnel/old/download<dot>html.

SLAM is well suited for use with uncalibrated environments, as itdefines its own frame of reference. Embodiments of the technology thatemploy handheld scanning devices (e.g., tethered hand-scanners, orwireless smartphones) are thus particularly suited for use with SLAMmethods.

Other arrangements for generating 3D information from plural images aredetailed in patent publications 20040258309, 20050238200, 20100182406,20100319100, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,137,491, 6,278,460, 6,760,488 and7,352,386. Related information is detailed in applicant's pendingapplication Ser. No. 13/088,259, filed Apr. 15, 2011.

For a review of perspective, the reader is referred to the Wikipediaarticle “3D Projection.” Wikipedia articles concerning “PlenopticCameras” and Light Field” provide additional information on thosetechnologies.

(Copies of many of the above-cited non-patent publications are attachedas appendices to application Ser. No. 13/231,893.)

CONCLUDING REMARKS

This specification details a variety of embodiments. It should beunderstood that the methods, elements and concepts detailed inconnection with one embodiment can be combined with the methods,elements and concepts detailed in connection with other embodiments.While some such arrangements have been particularly described, many havenot—due to the large number of permutations and combinations. However,implementation of all such combinations is straightforward to theartisan from the provided teachings.

Although features and arrangements are described, in some cases,individually, applicant intends that they will also be used together.Conversely, while certain methods and systems are detailed as includingmultiple features, applicant conceives that—in other embodiments—theindividual features thereof are usable independently.

The present specification should be read in the context of the citedreferences (with which the reader is presumed to be familiar) Thosereferences disclose technologies and teachings that applicant intends beincorporated into the certain embodiments of the present technology, andinto which the technologies and teachings detailed herein beincorporated.

To provide a comprehensive disclosure, while complying with thestatutory requirement of conciseness, applicantincorporates-by-reference each of the documents referenced herein. (Suchmaterials are incorporated in their entireties, even if cited above inconnection with specific of their teachings.)

In view of the wide variety of embodiments to which the principles andfeatures discussed above can be applied, it should be apparent that thedetailed embodiments are illustrative only, and should not be taken aslimiting the scope of the technology. Rather, applicant claim all suchmodifications as may come within the scope and spirit of the followingclaims and equivalents thereof.

1-37. (canceled)
 38. A method comprising the acts: with a camera in ashopper's mobile device, capturing imagery depicting plural productpackages on a store shelf; processing the imagery to decode digitalwatermark data encoded in said product packages; and presenting anaugmented reality display on a screen of the shopper's mobile device, inwhich expiration date information for different of the packages isdisplayed as a graphical overlay on the captured imagery.
 39. The methodof claim 38 in which the graphical overlay comprises a colored heat map,wherein the shopper can identify newest and oldest inventory among theplural packages.
 40. The method of claim 38 that includes capturing saidimagery using a headworn mobile device.
 41. A mobile system comprising acamera, a screen, a processor, and a memory, the memory containinginstructions configuring the system to perform acts including: capturingimagery depicting plural product packages on a store shelf; processingthe imagery to decode digital watermark data encoded in said productpackages; and presenting an augmented reality display on the screen, inwhich expiration date information for different of the packages isdisplayed as a graphical overlay on the captured imagery.
 42. The systemof claim 41 in which the graphical overlay comprises a colored heat map,wherein a user can identify newest and oldest inventory among the pluralpackages.
 43. A headworn system according to claim
 41. 44. Anon-transitory computer storage medium containing software instructionsadapted to configure a processor-based system to perform acts including:capturing imagery depicting plural product packages on a store shelf;processing the imagery to decode digital watermark data encoded in saidproduct packages; and presenting an augmented reality display on anassociated display screen, in which expiration date information fordifferent of the packages is displayed as a graphical overlay on thecaptured imagery.
 45. The computer storage medium of claim 44 in whichthe graphical overlay comprises a colored heat map.